Print

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

[Donald X.]

In my mind I'd been thinking of a princed card as a sort of infinite duration card, but then I got Conspirator in the kingdom and realized this is not so. Both princed cards and duration cards come into play at the start of the turn, but princed cards are counted towards a Conspirator's ability, whereas duration cards that come out are not counted. Correct?

You're right that Princed cards impact Conspirator (because you've played an action this turn) and duration cards don't (because you played it last turn). But it's not true that duration cards come into play at the start of the turn: they remain in play starting from the time you play them until the cleanup phase of the turn in which they "finished" doing what the card text says to do (for all existing duration cards, this is the next turn). Goko/MF's interface kinda makes them look not-in-play by moving them to a separate mat-looking area, but that's just so that the computer can reuse the same screen real estate for your play area and your opponent's: really those cards are still right in front of you in your play area during your opponent's turn.

Correct. Duration cards stay in play until discarded on the next turn. Peddler cares about that and counts them; Conspirator only cares about what you played the same turn, and you didn't play last turn's duration cards this turn, so it doesn't count them. Prince plays a card and so that card counts for both Conspirator and Peddler.

[Lord Humanton]

In my mind I'd been thinking of a princed card as a sort of infinite duration card, but then I got Conspirator in the kingdom and realized this is not so. Both princed cards and duration cards come into play at the start of the turn, but princed cards are counted towards a Conspirator's ability, whereas duration cards that come out are not counted. Correct?

You're right that Princed cards impact Conspirator (because you've played an action this turn) and duration cards don't (because you played it last turn). But it's not true that duration cards come into play at the start of the turn: they remain in play starting from the time you play them until the cleanup phase of the turn in which they "finished" doing what the card text says to do (for all existing duration cards, this is the next turn). Goko/MF's interface kinda makes them look not-in-play by moving them to a separate mat-looking area, but that's just so that the computer can reuse the same screen real estate for your play area and your opponent's: really those cards are still right in front of you in your play area during your opponent's turn.

Correct. Duration cards stay in play until discarded on the next turn. Peddler cares about that and counts them; Conspirator only cares about what you played the same turn, and you didn't play last turn's duration cards this turn, so it doesn't count them. Prince plays a card and so that card counts for both Conspirator and Peddler.

That's what I thought but I hadn't seen it discussed before. Thanks for the quick reply.

[Kirian]

In my mind I'd been thinking of a princed card as a sort of infinite duration card, but then I got Conspirator in the kingdom and realized this is not so. Both princed cards and duration cards come into play at the start of the turn, but princed cards are counted towards a Conspirator's ability, whereas duration cards that come out are not counted. Correct?

You're right that Princed cards impact Conspirator (because you've played an action this turn) and duration cards don't (because you played it last turn). But it's not true that duration cards come into play at the start of the turn: they remain in play starting from the time you play them until the cleanup phase of the turn in which they "finished" doing what the card text says to do (for all existing duration cards, this is the next turn). Goko/MF's interface kinda makes them look not-in-play by moving them to a separate mat-looking area, but that's just so that the computer can reuse the same screen real estate for your play area and your opponent's: really those cards are still right in front of you in your play area during your opponent's turn.

Correct. Duration cards stay in play until discarded on the next turn. Peddler cares about that and counts them; Conspirator only cares about what you played the same turn, and you didn't play last turn's duration cards this turn, so it doesn't count them. Prince plays a card and so that card counts for both Conspirator and Peddler.

Prince doesn't count for Peddler though, right?  It is set aside as soon as it's played, and thus is never "in play"?

But it would count for Conspirator on the turn it was first played, right?

[AJD]

Prince doesn't count for Peddler though, right?  It is set aside as soon as it's played, and thus is never "in play"?

But it would count for Conspirator on the turn it was first played, right?

Right. (Well, setting aside Prince is in principle optional; if you play Prince but decide not to actually use it, then it's in play and counts for Peddler.)

[SirPeebles]

Prince doesn't count for Peddler though, right?  It is set aside as soon as it's played, and thus is never "in play"?

But it would count for Conspirator on the turn it was first played, right?

Right. (Well, setting aside Prince is in principle optional; if you play Prince but decide not to actually use it, then it's in play and counts for Peddler.)

But then, this isn't the principal Prince principle.

[Witherweaver]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.  Which is somehow better than Princing any other card because of some weird edge case...?

[LastFootnote]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

[Witherweaver]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

Why?

[LastFootnote]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

Why?

Wait…yes. I see what you mean now. Assuming you got Prince down to $4, you could do that. Weird.

[SirPeebles]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

Why?

Wait…yes. I see what you mean now. Assuming you got Prince down to $4, you could do that. Weird.

That shouldn't be terribly difficult.  Prince only costs $5 on BGG.

[amalloy]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.  Which is somehow better than Princing any other card because of some weird edge case...?

Seems like it could theoretically be possible, in a game with mostly alt-vp kingdom cards and Horn of Plenty. Like, you want your Horns to be worth a Province, but there aren't enough unique cards that you can legally play, without including Prince. But I suppose Prince of Bridges is strictly better than Prince of Princes in that case, and you need a cost-reducer in the kingdom to make this possible. Maybe your opponent Swindled all your Bridges into Gardens, but you anticipated this by Princeing a Prince? Certainly hard to imagine, but probably not impossible.

[GeoLib]

Has someone gotten an answer on why it's optional to set aside prince? Golem/Herald/TR-TR edge cases or something? Hardly seems worth the extra wording. Wouldn't "Set aside this and an action card from your hand costing up to $4" be a lot simpler?

[scott_pilgrim]

Has someone gotten an answer on why it's optional to set aside prince? Golem/Herald/TR-TR edge cases or something? Hardly seems worth the extra wording. Wouldn't "Set aside this and an action card from your hand costing up to $4" be a lot simpler?

The Golem/Herald/TR edge cases could lead to accountability issues (Prince forces you to set aside an action card from your hand, you claim not to have any because you don't want to set it aside for some reason, and your opponent can't verify that you really don't have any action cards to set aside).

[Donald X.]

Has someone gotten an answer on why it's optional to set aside prince? Golem/Herald/TR-TR edge cases or something? Hardly seems worth the extra wording. Wouldn't "Set aside this and an action card from your hand costing up to $4" be a lot simpler?

It has to say "if you do" to stop you from Throning Prince successfully, and "if you do" makes more sense with a "you may" in there. I go back and forth on keeping you honest for things like Throne but where possible I still prefer it. Prince does cost $8, so it's nice not to be forced to set it aside pointlessly via Herald/Golem.

[GeoLib]

Ok. Both good points. Thanks!

[enfynet]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

Why?

Wait…yes. I see what you mean now. Assuming you got Prince down to $4, you could do that. Weird.

That shouldn't be terribly difficult.  Prince only costs $5 on BGG.

I paid $6. There was an option to overpay by $1 to gain the card after I bought it.

[theory]

So you could Prince a Prince and choose not to set aside the Prince Princed every turn in order to have an automatic -$2 to Peddler every turn.

No.

Why?

Wait…yes. I see what you mean now. Assuming you got Prince down to $4, you could do that. Weird.

That shouldn't be terribly difficult.  Prince only costs $5 on BGG.

I paid $6. There was an option to overpay by $1 to gain the card after I bought it.

Just like Nomad Camp, overpay to put it on top of your deck.