Print

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

[AJD]

Okay, well, if I reveal a Watchtower to topdeck the gained card, THEN Transmogrify will lose track of it.

What if the gained card is Nomad Camp?

See previous page, there are 13 posts that mention Nomad Camp.

But none about what happens if you use a Watchtower to topdeck Nomad Camp!

[AJD]

I'm disappointed the art isn't an upside down cardboard box.

That was Donald's prototype art.

So if you rotate Transmogrify 90 degrees then it becomes Duplicate?

Now I see where he got his names for things.  Bill Watterson will not be happy, Donald X.

Time Machine would be a great name for a Reserve card.

[DG]

All these reserve cards are making end games even more complicated.

[Asper]

I mean, barring weird starting turn stuff, the playing and upgrading are going to be done with different hands.

That got me thinking, if i Prince a Reserve, and call it the turn i play it, can i play (and call) it again next turn? I would guess that yes, i can.

Edit: But maybe Prince would lose track, as the Reserve wasn't where it thought it would be, inbetween.

[LastFootnote]

I mean, barring weird starting turn stuff, the playing and upgrading are going to be done with different hands.

That got me thinking, if i Prince a Reserve, and call it the turn i play it, can i play (and call) it again next turn? I would guess that yes, i can.

Edit: But maybe Prince would lose track, as the Reserve wasn't where it thought it would be, inbetween.

I had this same question. You cannot. Prince loses track of it.

[werothegreat]

What about Verklärung for a German translation?  I'm in an orchestra playing Strauss's Tod und Verklärung at the moment.

[2.71828.....]

[jonts26]

Confirmed: Dominion now has zaps.

[Awaclus]

Confirmed: Dominion now has zaps.

Well, you obviously need zaps for Adventures.

[joel88s]

What about Verklärung for a German translation?  I'm in an orchestra playing Strauss's Tod und Verklärung at the moment.

At this very moment?! Cool. Are you a brass player? [who notoriously have books open on their stands during long rests in performances] Hope the conductor can't see your iPad.
Verklärung is strictly Transfiguration of course, which is in a way almost opposite of transmogrification (which my spell-correct knows, hey!). Still I kind of like it. Only thing is, if they use that and there every is a Transfiguration card, then they'd be screwed.

[joel88s]

Regarding where a Transmogrified Nomad Camp goes [not a phrase I ever foresaw myself writing], I can see the fun of parsing the grammar and arguing it one way or the other, but ultimately -

Transmogrification: 'gain a card... and put that card into your hand'
Nomad Camp: 'When you gain this, put it on top of you deck'

- both clearly on-gain effects, seem to me as close to conflicting instructions as you're going to get. And thus would need to be resolved by rule (as I assume they doubtless are).

Yes, I understand the concept that if one card acts first, it can obviate the ability to obey the other (assuming lose track applies; if not then oddly the latter acting card would win the day.) I guess I'm saying any attempt to determine sequence from those phrases seems to me ultimately more speculative than dispositive.

[jdgordon]

I won't be satisfied until I transmog a Familiar into a Golem after the curses run out

Is this actually legal? AFAIK you cant usually use the remodel type cards with potion costing cards?

[markusin]

I won't be satisfied until I transmog a Familiar into a Golem after the curses run out

Is this actually legal? AFAIK you cant usually use the remodel type cards with potion costing cards?

Of course you can. You just can't use Remodel to turn a non-potion costing card into a potion costing one. Ever. You can however trash a Scrying Pool into a Golem with Remodel, or into any $4 potion or non-potion costing card for that matter.

You can even trash a Scrying Pool with Stonemason to get two $2 cards. But you can't gain potion costing card by trashing a non-potion costing card with Stonemason.

[werothegreat]

I won't be satisfied until I transmog a Familiar into a Golem after the curses run out

Is this actually legal? AFAIK you cant usually use the remodel type cards with potion costing cards?

Yes.  You can't Remodel from a non-Potion card to a Potion card, but you can certainly go from Potion card to Potion card.  Golem costs exactly $1 more than Familiar.

What about Verklärung for a German translation?  I'm in an orchestra playing Strauss's Tod und Verklärung at the moment.

At this very moment?! Cool. Are you a brass player? [who notoriously have books open on their stands during long rests in performances] Hope the conductor can't see your iPad.
Verklärung is strictly Transfiguration of course, which is in a way almost opposite of transmogrification (which my spell-correct knows, hey!). Still I kind of like it. Only thing is, if they use that and there every is a Transfiguration card, then they'd be screwed.

I play bassoon.

[werothegreat]

I think I finally get the Nomad Camp interaction.

Lose Track happens when two things happen at the same time, and one moves a card from where the other expects it to be.  E.g. Hermit/Scheme.  Hermit can't trash itself because it's not in play - Scheme put it on your deck.

The No Visiting rule says that cards gained to somewhere other than the discard pile just go straight where they're going.  This isn't something else happening when gaining, this is just a different gain destination. 

However, if other cards want to move it, they can conflict.  If I gain a Silver, and reveal Watchtower to trash it, then react Royal Seal to topdeck it, Royal Seal can't find the card.

So let's imagine a ShitWatchtower that can be revealed to put a card in your discard pile.

I Transmogrify Woodcutter into a Nomad Camp.  I gain a Nomad Camp.
* NC wants to go to the top of my deck.
* If I don't reveal ShitWT, Transmogrify has kept track of NC, and puts it in my hand.
* If I do reveal ShitWT, NC goes into my discard pile.  Transmogrify was expecting it on the top of my deck, but can't find it now doesn't care where it's going and keeps track of it.  NC doesn't go into my hand.

EDIT: Further parsing of No Visiting has led me to conclude that a Watchtower'd (to your deck, not trashed) or Royal Seal'd card should follow the same policy - it should not visit the discard pile, and should not be lost track of.

"When you gain" happens before the card hits the location it's going.

[werothegreat]

Okay, this is starting to hurt my head.  Following this, then it means that Transmogrify's to-hand gain also does not happen *after* gaining.  Let's look at Border Village:

*If Transmogrify's put-in-hand happens after gaining, you turn a $5 into Border Village.  BV goes into your discard pile.  At the same time, you gain something cheaper, which also goes into your discard pile.  That something goes on top of BV.  Now, when Transmogrify looks for BV to put it in your hand, it has *definitely* lost track of it - there's something covering it up.

*If Transmogrify's put-in-hand is the same as Nomad Camp's put-on-deck, then the BV would be rerouted to your hand, while the cheaper something would go to your discard pile.

[AJD]

Transmogrification: 'gain a card... and put that card into your hand'
Nomad Camp: 'When you gain this, put it on top of you deck'

- both clearly on-gain effects, seem to me as close to conflicting instructions as you're going to get.

No, neither of these is an on-gain effect. An on-gain effect takes place immediately after you gain a card.

Nomad Camp, sadly, is phrased as an on-gain effect (it has the same phrasing as, say, Inn and Border Village, "when you gain this"), but Donald X. has ruled that it's not. If Nomad Camp's self-topdecking were an on-gain effect, what would happen would be: (1) gain Nomad Camp (to your discard pile), and then immediately (2) put Nomad Camp on your deck. But that's not what happens; Nomad Camp goes directly to your deck. So instead of having an on-gain effect, it just has a nonstandard gain destination. This puts Nomad Camp in the small class of cards whose text isn't a correct description of what they actually do in terms of a strict interpretation of the game rules.

Transmogrification is phrased as two instructions, one after another: (1) gain a card, and then (2) put that card in your hand. (2) isn't an on-gain effect; it's just a thing that happens. Any on-gain effects of the card gained in (1) must therefore take place before (2). Compare Rats, which tells you to (1') gain another Rats and (2') trash something. (2') isn't an "on-gain effect" of (1').

[AJD]

So let's imagine a ShitWatchtower that can be revealed to put a card in your discard pile.

I Transmogrify Woodcutter into a Nomad Camp.  I gain a Nomad Camp.
* NC wants to go to the top of my deck.
* If I don't reveal ShitWT, Transmogrify has kept track of NC, and puts it in my hand.
* If I do reveal ShitWT, NC goes into my discard pile.  Transmogrify was expecting it on the top of my deck, but can't find it now doesn't care where it's going and keeps track of it.  NC doesn't go into my hand.

No, you were right the first time. Transmogrify is expecting it to be where it was gained to (your deck), and then something else moved it (ShitWT), so lose-track takes effect and Transmogrify can't find it.

EDIT: Further parsing of No Visiting has led me to conclude that a Watchtower'd (to your deck, not trashed) or Royal Seal'd card should follow the same policy - it should not visit the discard pile, and should not be lost track of.

This is wrong. Watchtower and Royal Seal are when-gain effects; then only activate after the gained card has hit the discard pile (or wherever it would be going).

"When you gain" happens before the card hits the location it's going.

No, a thousand times no. Compare Inn, which must be in the discard pile before its when-gain effect activates.

[AJD]

Okay, this is starting to hurt my head.  Following this, then it means that Transmogrify's to-hand gain also does not happen *after* gaining.  Let's look at Border Village:

*If Transmogrify's put-in-hand happens after gaining, you turn a $5 into Border Village.  BV goes into your discard pile.  At the same time, you gain something cheaper, which also goes into your discard pile.  That something goes on top of BV.  Now, when Transmogrify looks for BV to put it in your hand, it has *definitely* lost track of it - there's something covering it up.

*If Transmogrify's put-in-hand is the same as Nomad Camp's put-on-deck, then the BV would be rerouted to your hand, while the cheaper something would go to your discard pile.

Hmm, this is a serious conundrum, actually, isn't it. I agree that, the way Transmogrify is phrased, as a sequence (1) gain something and then (2) put the gained thing in your hand, Transmogrify should lose track of Border Village and not put it in hand. So is this the correct interpretation? Or should Transmogrify actually be interpreted in the same way as Explorer's "gain a Silver, putting it in your hand" after all, as a redirected gain with no visiting? I think we might need Donald to clarify this one.

[LastFootnote]

Hmm, this is a serious conundrum, actually, isn't it. I agree that, the way Transmogrify is phrased, as a sequence (1) gain something and then (2) put the gained thing in your hand, Transmogrify should lose track of Border Village and not put it in hand. So is this the correct interpretation? Or should Transmogrify actually be interpreted in the same way as Explorer's "gain a Silver, putting it in your hand" after all, as a redirected gain with no visiting? I think we might need Donald to clarify this one.

I am not 100% sure, but I am pretty sure the intent is no visiting. The gained card should go right to your hand. Admittedly it could be phrased better on the card.

[swedenman]

Hmm, this is a serious conundrum, actually, isn't it. I agree that, the way Transmogrify is phrased, as a sequence (1) gain something and then (2) put the gained thing in your hand, Transmogrify should lose track of Border Village and not put it in hand. So is this the correct interpretation? Or should Transmogrify actually be interpreted in the same way as Explorer's "gain a Silver, putting it in your hand" after all, as a redirected gain with no visiting? I think we might need Donald to clarify this one.

I am not 100% sure, but I am pretty sure the intent is no visiting. The gained card should go right to your hand. Admittedly it could be phrased better on the card.

Is there any reason we think this might not be correct? The no-visiting rule seems pretty clear on this point, the way I'm reading it. It is confusing, though.

[joel88s]

Does someone have a link to the No Visiting rule, or know which expansion rulebook it's in if it is?

[Gherald]

Does someone have a link to the No Visiting rule, or know which expansion rulebook it's in if it is?

Here

[assemble_me]

Well I suppose we'll see how it pans out once Adventures is available online. I can pretty much guarantee you it's not weak with Rats, Cultist, etc. And if you ignore it on a Fortress board and your opponent doesn't, you will lose. Its exact strength in the general case is still up in the air.

EDIT: Although I am curious how e.g. Stef and Mic feel about the card vis a vis its strength.

So... this card is Hot Air Balloon, then ?

[werothegreat]

Does someone have a link to the No Visiting rule, or know which expansion rulebook it's in if it is?

http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Dark_Ages#.22No_visiting.22_rule

Hmm, this is a serious conundrum, actually, isn't it. I agree that, the way Transmogrify is phrased, as a sequence (1) gain something and then (2) put the gained thing in your hand, Transmogrify should lose track of Border Village and not put it in hand. So is this the correct interpretation? Or should Transmogrify actually be interpreted in the same way as Explorer's "gain a Silver, putting it in your hand" after all, as a redirected gain with no visiting? I think we might need Donald to clarify this one.

I am not 100% sure, but I am pretty sure the intent is no visiting. The gained card should go right to your hand. Admittedly it could be phrased better on the card.

Is there any reason we think this might not be correct? The no-visiting rule seems pretty clear on this point, the way I'm reading it. It is confusing, though.

My current thought is that any when-gain that changes the destination of a card (as long as you actually end up getting it into your possession, and not, say, trashing it) is just rerouting it; the card doesn't visit where it was trying to go.  So to me, gain destinations should be the only exception to lose-track (provided it doesn't get covered up in the meantime).

I would defer to Donald X, though, of course.

EDIT: An interesting consequence of this is that if the cheaper card Border Village gains is Nomad Camp, you don't lose track of BV.