Print

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

[SCSN]

Code: [Select]

//Highway
OnEnteringPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-1)

//Altered Highway
OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
   
//Bridge
OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnCleanup:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
As far as I can tell this is all consistent with the general rules of Dominion, the cards' intended behavior (including TR, Procession, etc.) and the common interpretation of English. There is no weirdness, ambiguity or need for additional rulings.

[Awaclus]

What's the meaning behind saying that it still "functions"? It's not doing anything, how is that functioning? The part that has an implicit "until this leaves play" is the "while this is in play". "While this is in play" is synonymous with "from the time this enters play until the time it leaves play".

That it still does the same thing the next time I play it. If it followed the logic that SCSN and Donald X. are suggesting the modified Highway does, it would reduce costs the first time I play it, but after it has left play once, it would be just a vanilla cantrip for the rest of the game because apparently the ability no longer functions.

Code: [Select]

//Highway
OnEnteringPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-1)

//Altered Highway
OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
   
//Bridge
OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnCleanup:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
As far as I can tell this is all consistent with the general rules of Dominion, the cards' intended behavior (including TR, Procession, etc.) and the common interpretation of English. There is no weirdness, ambiguity or need for additional rulings.

Except that

Code: [Select]

OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
is not consistent with the other two. Bridge's continuous effect that it sets up does not stop functioning when it leaves play after the effect has been set up, and Highway's continuous effect that it actually has does not stop functioning when it leaves play for the first time during the game. This would be consistent:

Code: [Select]

OnPlay:
    newAbility = New(abilities)
OnEnteringPlay:
    For Each ability In abilities
        gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
OnLeavingPlay:
    For Each ability In abilities
        gameState.ReduceCosts(-1)

[SCSN]

If it followed the logic that SCSN and Donald X. are suggesting the modified Highway does, it would reduce costs the first time I play it, but after it has left play once, it would be just a vanilla cantrip for the rest of the game because apparently the ability no longer functions.

I have no idea why you think there's a difference between the first and the nth play. See my code, that's exactly how it would behave and it would display non of the behavior you describe.

Except that

Code: [Select]

OnPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(1)
    this.CostReduction += 1
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0
is not consistent with the other two.

I'm not sure what sort of consistency you're looking for here. All these implementations are consistent with the rules of Dominion in the sense that they don't violate them and reflect the intended behavior of the cards. Of course they are not the same as each other: we're talking about different cards with different effects and different scopes, which naturally leads to differences in implementation.

Bridge's continuous effect that it sets up does not stop functioning when it leaves play after the effect has been set up

Correct, see the code.

Highway's continuous effect that it actually has does not stop functioning when it leaves play for the first time during the game.

That's just not true (and the code reflects that), as has been confirmed by Donald, so I'm not sure why we're still arguing that. Ok, because I'm still responding. Touchι.

[Awaclus]

I'm not sure what sort of consistency you're looking for here. All these implementations are consistent with the rules of Dominion in the sense that they don't violate them and reflect the intended behavior of the cards. Of course they are not the same as each other: we're talking about different cards with different effects and different scopes, which naturally leads to differences in implementation.

The kind of consistency that "while this is in play" should always mean the same thing. It shouldn't mean "for the rest of the game, while this is in play" for one card and "the first time you play this after setting up this effect, while this is in play" for another, it should mean "for the rest of the game, while this is in play" for both.

That's just not true (and the code reflects that), as has been confirmed by Donald, so I'm not sure why we're still arguing that. Ok, because I'm still responding. Touchι.

It just is true, and the code reflects that. It's ridiculous to suggest that Highways become vanilla cantrips for the rest of the game when they leave play for the first time.

[Haddock]

It's ridiculous to suggest that Highways become vanilla cantrips for the rest of the game when they leave play for the first time.

Noone is suggesting this.  None of us have ever come close to suggesting this.  Which part of the code is making you think that that's what SCSN means?

The claim that me, SCSN and DXV (!) are making is that "While this is in play" is synonymous with "When this enters play, until it leaves play".  The code reflects that interpretation.  You play Highway, it is in play, it reduces costs by 1.  When it leaves play, costs go back to normal.  If it enters play again it reduces costs by 1.  In particular, if you play it again, it reduces costs by 1, just like it always did.

[Awaclus]

In particular, if you play it again, it reduces costs by 1, just like it always did.

In other words, the ability does not stop functioning.

[Haddock]

In other words, the ability does not stop functioning.

SCSN has been over this.  The ability does stop functioning in between plays.  While the card is not in play, the ability is not functioning.

When you play the card again, the ability starts functioning again.  Like SCSN's vacation pay example.  Every time you play the card, it renews its promise to reduce costs by 1 until it leaves play.

[SCSN]

In particular, if you play it again, it reduces costs by 1, just like it always did.

In other words, the ability does not stop functioning.

If you would also say that all the abilities of all the Dominion cards currently stored in my cupboard are still functioning, then I think we've reached an agreement.

[Awaclus]

In other words, the ability does not stop functioning.

SCSN has been over this.  The ability does stop functioning in between plays.  While the card is not in play, the ability is not functioning.

When you play the card again, the ability starts functioning again.  Like SCSN's vacation pay example.  Every time you play the card, it renews its promise to reduce costs by 1 until it leaves play.

Well, if you want to think of it that way, it's fine too. Then why don't all of the "while in play" abilities set up by previous plays of Altered Highway also start functioning again when the card enters play again?

[Haddock]

Altered Highway would never exist, as Donald has said, so it's probably no longer fruitful to talk about that.

[Awaclus]

Altered Highway would never exist, as Donald has said, so it's probably no longer fruitful to talk about that.

So it was fruitful to talk about it until you ran out of arguments?

[Haddock]

Altered Highway would never exist, as Donald has said, so it's probably no longer fruitful to talk about that.

So it was fruitful to talk about it until you ran out of arguments?

If it is important to your self-esteem to believe that, then I will happily concede it.  God forbid I cause you immeasurable psychological harm by making you lose an argument.

[Awaclus]

If it is important to your self-esteem to believe that, then I will happily concede it.  God forbid I cause you immeasurable psychological harm by making you lose an argument.

I'm not particularly trying to win an argument here, I'm trying to reach a conclusion. Besides, how exactly do you think you're making me lose an argument by refusing to answer my question?

[Haddock]

Besides, how exactly do you think you're making me lose an argument by refusing to answer my question?

I'm not.  I'm just leaving the discussion; I'm tired of it.  I'm saying that if you wish to interpret that as you having won the argument, then feel free to do so.

[GendoIkari]

In other words, the ability does not stop functioning.

SCSN has been over this.  The ability does stop functioning in between plays.  While the card is not in play, the ability is not functioning.

When you play the card again, the ability starts functioning again.  Like SCSN's vacation pay example.  Every time you play the card, it renews its promise to reduce costs by 1 until it leaves play.

Well, if you want to think of it that way, it's fine too. Then why don't all of the "while in play" abilities set up by previous plays of Altered Highway also start functioning again when the card enters play again?

Once Highway leaves play, whether it's Altered Highway or Regular Highway, the ability is gone. That same instance of that ability will never be back. When you play Highway again, a new ability is created that's just like that first one. Just like a continuous effect in MTG. SCSN's code seemed like a perfect explanation to me. What part of his code do you disagree with?

[ehunt]

Suppose that a card was of the form:

Squeegee - Action - 7
While any Gold is in play, costs are reduced by 1 (but not less than zero).

If you Procession a Squeegee (b/c you want to get a Prince, obvi), then play a gold in your buy phase, are costs reduced, or not?

[Haddock]

Yes.  Costs would be reduced by two, since there's no "while this is in play" restriction on Squeegee, it only cares whether Gold is in play.  Squeegee is basically a conditional Bridge.

In fact Squeegee would need a "This turn, While any Gold...", otherwise its effect lasts forever.

[LastFootnote]

I think I understand what Awaclus is saying. Messed Up Highway introduces an effect on-play, and the effect is only active while the card is in play. But it doesn't state when the effect ends, so that effect should come back the next time you play that copy of Messed Up Highway (along with a new cost reduction for a total of a $2 reduction). I think that's a perfectly valid (perhaps even the best) interpretation of the text.

However, it has obvious tracking issues. There's no good way to track how many times you've played a Messed Up Highway, nor is there a good way to track which copy is which. And cards that have severe tracking issues as part of their everyday functionality don't get published.

To fix the issues, you would of course specify when the effect ends. "Until this leaves play, cards cost $1 less." And then make sure it's a non-Duration card so that it gets discarded during Clean-up. Of course the friendlier, nearly-identical phrasing is, "This turn, cards cost $1 less," and that's what Bridge has.

[Awaclus]

Once Highway leaves play, whether it's Altered Highway or Regular Highway, the ability is gone. That same instance of that ability will never be back. When you play Highway again, a new ability is created that's just like that first one. Just like a continuous effect in MTG. SCSN's code seemed like a perfect explanation to me. What part of his code do you disagree with?

Well, that's an incredibly convoluted way to put it, but if that's how you want to interpret Regular Highway, then Altered Highway will also create new abilities for each "while this is in play" effect that it has previously set up every time it enters play. There should be essentially no difference between "When you play this, while this is in play, cards cost $1 less" and "When you play this, this card gains 'while this is in play, cards cost $1 less' below a dividing line".

[ehunt]

Yes.  Costs would be reduced by two, since there's no "while this is in play" restriction on Squeegee, it only cares whether Gold is in play.  Squeegee is basically a conditional Bridge.

In fact Squeegee would need a "This turn, While any Gold...", otherwise its effect lasts forever.

Then you should agree with Awaclus about what messed-up highway does. If you procession messed-up highway, but manage to get it back into play (ignoring tracking issues which are why this should never be a card), what happens? Three "while this is in play" effects have been created, and "this" is indeed in play.

[Haddock]

Then you should agree with Awaclus about what messed-up highway does. If you procession messed-up highway, but manage to get it back into play (ignoring tracking issues which are why this should never be a card), what happens? Three "while this is in play" effects have been created, and "this" is indeed in play.

No.  Your example is completely unrelated, since Squeegee does not have a "while this is in play" clause.  It has a "while there is Gold in play" clause.  Two completely different issues.  One card is self-referencing, the other is not.

[SCSN]

To fix the issues, you would of course specify when the effect ends. "Until this leaves play, cards cost $1 less." And then make sure it's a non-Duration card so that it gets discarded during Clean-up. Of course the friendlier, nearly-identical phrasing is "This turn, cards cost $1 less," and that's what Bridge has.

"While this is in play" and "Until this leaves play" are functionally equivalent, just like these promises are:

1. While you're in the hospital, I'll take care of your job.
2. Until you leave the hospital, I'll take care of your job.

Even if you might want to argue that "while" could be slightly ambiguous in a technical sense, there's just no way that in practice you'd expect someone who made you the first promise once to take care of your job during all your future hospitalizations. And because the default interpretation of language is ultimately determined by its common use, I really don't see any reasonable room for other interpretations of "while this in play" than the one advanced by me and quite a few others, including Donald:

Hypothetical Messed Up Highway For Having Bad Rules Conversations About How Confusing Phrasings That Would Never Exist Should Be Interpreted, with no dividing line, has an implicit "when you play this" on its abilities, like all Action cards have above the line that's there or isn't. "When you play this, while this is in play, cards cost $1 less etc." looks to me like it stops functioning when the card leaves play.

[Awaclus]

To fix the issues, you would of course specify when the effect ends. "Until this leaves play, cards cost $1 less." And then make sure it's a non-Duration card so that it gets discarded during Clean-up. Of course the friendlier, nearly-identical phrasing is "This turn, cards cost $1 less," and that's what Bridge has.

"While this is in play" and "Until this leaves play" are functionally equivalent, just like these promises are:

1. While you're in the hospital, I'll take care of your job.
2. Until you leave the hospital, I'll take care of your job.

Even if you might want to argue that "while" could be slightly ambiguous in a technical sense, there's just no way that in practice you'd expect someone who made you the first promise once to take care of your job during all your future hospitalizations. And because the default interpretation of language is ultimately determined by its common use, I really don't see any reasonable room for other interpretations of "while this in play" than the one advanced by me and quite a few others.

Then why isn't the Regular Highway like this?

Code: [Select]

AtTheStartOfTheGame:
    this.CostReduction = 1
OnEnteringPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(this.CostReduction)
OnLeavingPlay:
    gameState.ReduceCosts(-this.CostReduction)
    this.CostReduction = 0

[markusin]

To fix the issues, you would of course specify when the effect ends. "Until this leaves play, cards cost $1 less." And then make sure it's a non-Duration card so that it gets discarded during Clean-up. Of course the friendlier, nearly-identical phrasing is "This turn, cards cost $1 less," and that's what Bridge has.

"While this is in play" and "Until this leaves play" are functionally equivalent, just like these promises are:

1. While you're in the hospital, I'll take care of your job.
2. Until you leave the hospital, I'll take care of your job.

Even if you might want to argue that "while" could be slightly ambiguous in a technical sense, there's just no way that in practice you'd expect someone who made you the first promise once to take care of your job during all your future hospitalizations. And because the default interpretation of language is ultimately determined by its common use, I really don't see any reasonable room for other interpretations of "while this in play" than the one advanced by me and quite a few others.

The issue is that in Dominion, on-play effects have never hinged on the card remaining in play for you to get the benefit. If I play Peddler with Procession, I don't lose the +2 coins after Peddler is removed from play. I don't lose the +2 cards from Caravan next turn after it's trashed by Procession. The wording of each card has never had an implicit "while this remains in play until it leaves play" on any on-play effects. Bridge has "this turn" on it.

In regular English speech, you would not interpret "while on vacation, X" to mean every time you go on vacation X will be true. However in Dominion no on-play effects remain tied to the card being in play to remain in effect. You can't return a Madman to the Supply a second time when it's played with Throne Room, but the attempt to do so still occurs.

Donald has said that he would never make a card with the while-in-play kind of wording above the line, perhaps because these inconsistencies and misinterpretations are possible. In English the meaning might be obvious, but in a Dominion context there is room for debate.

I'm content leaving things as "this wording should never exist in the first place". If it did, the interpretation of the effect by Awaclus is valid.

[markusin]

I think while-in-play effects could be put above the line with the parenthetical clarification "While in play effects produced by the same card do not stack".