Print

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

[GendoIkari]

Ok so we're reacting to gaining or buying. I think it's safe to assume that the buying option is best to be used as a way of either nerfing an effect, or fixing something that breaks; so we'll default to gaining for now. Similarly for "would gain", I think it's fair to say that any "gain" option can be changed to "would gain" if it makes sense.

The question is, who is doing the gaining? And what are they gaining? I'm going to try to combine these options into one poll. And we'll try to allow multiple votes and see how that works. So pick whichever options you'd like to see done, up to 3.

So "Some condition" could either be a specific card (like Fool's Gold with Province), or a card that meets some criteria, like a victory card or a card costing a certain amount.

Poll closes Wednesday at this time.

[Roadrunner7671]

I voted for 'when another player gains a card' and 'when another player gains a card (condition).' We have Watchtower for when you gain a card, Watchtower is fine. Fool's Gold is sort of 'when your opponent gains a card,' but I think you should interact more on another player's turn. I didn't vote 'a player' because I think that would trigger too often.

[eHalcyon]

First

Please stop.  If you really feel you have to do this, at least add some extra commentary so your post isn't entirely useless.  It's just internet etiquette.

Ok so we're reacting to gaining or buying. I think it's safe to assume that the buying option is best to be used as a way of either nerfing an effect, or fixing something that breaks; so we'll default to gaining for now. Similarly for "would gain", I think it's fair to say that any "gain" option can be changed to "would gain" if it makes sense.

The question is, who is doing the gaining? And what are they gaining? I'm going to try to combine these options into one poll. And we'll try to allow multiple votes and see how that works. So pick whichever options you'd like to see done, up to 3.

So "Some condition" could either be a specific card (like Fool's Gold with Province), or a card that meets some criteria, like a victory card or a card costing a certain amount.

Poll closes Wednesday at this time.

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

[Roadrunner7671]

No one is going to read this thread, and I need to post this somewhere.

Scout is getting removed. I've known this since January 30th, 2016. I can't confront Donald because then he'll know I know. I can't confront Donald after he announces it either, because then it'll be too late. So I don't know what to do.

I don't want to lie down and die though. Scout needs to live on.

[GendoIkari]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

[LastFootnote]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

I think on-gain/would-gain should be a function of what the reaction actually ends up doing. For that reason, I'm fine with would-gain not having its own poll option.

[Gubump]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

Here's an example (I do know that this wouldn't actually work): "When another player would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, you gain that card instead." If it said "gains" instead of "would gain," you and that player would both gain a copy of that card.

[Kirian]

*Discreet*, dammit.  Damn that pisses me off.

[GendoIkari]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

Here's an example (I do know that this wouldn't actually work): "When another player would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, you gain that card instead." If it said "gains" instead of "would gain," you and that player would both gain a copy of that card.

Not saying it's a good wording, but you could say "when another player gains a card, you may reveal this. If you do, gain that card." Same end result. Or you could say to put the card back in the supply, instead of preventing the gain in the first place. Of course that would be worse wording. But I think it's like LF says, which wording you want depends on the effect you want, not the other way around.

[GendoIkari]

*Discreet*, dammit.  Damn that pisses me off.

. ?

[Infthitbox]

*Discreet*, dammit.  Damn that pisses me off.

To be fair, the poll is also discrete; you can only choose an integer-number of choices from integer-number options.

[eHalcyon]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

I think "would gain" already implies that it stops the gain somehow, whereas "gain" does not.  I might be reading too much into it, but I can't think of a good reason to use "would gain" otherwise.  As an aside, I would not recommend "when another/any player would gain" because it would probably end up too disruptive and/or political, not to mention it would have some timing issues with multiple players revealing.

[GendoIkari]

I think "would gain" is significantly different enough that it should be a separate option.  I guess we could vote on it afterwards, since this poll is already up.

Can you explain more? Seems to me that anything you want to do could theoretically be done with either wording. With the exception of the fact that it doesn't trigger at the same time as other "when you gain" effects.

I think "would gain" already implies that it stops the gain somehow, whereas "gain" does not.  I might be reading too much into it, but I can't think of a good reason to use "would gain" otherwise.  As an aside, I would not recommend "when another/any player would gain" because it would probably end up too disruptive and/or political, not to mention it would have some timing issues with multiple players revealing.

I agree. The point was that if we decide we want the effect to stop the gaining, then we can decide that during the "decide the effect" part, and if the chosen effect does stop the gaining, then we'll use "would gain" (even though you could do it without "would", it would just be worse wording).

[liopoil]

I voted for when you gain a card. We obviously will make it do something different from Watchtower, but since they react to the same thing, it will be an awesome combo!

[schadd]

margravagrand market squarehousty steed: $5 action-reaction
trash a card from your hand. gain a copy of it.
____________________________________________________
when you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand and discard it. if you do, trash the gained card and gain another port.

[Kirian]

*Discreet*, dammit.  Damn that pisses me off.

. ?

This poll has its answers hidden.  That makes it discreet (secret).  "Discrete" is the opposite of continuous.

To be fair, the poll is also discrete; you can only choose an integer-number of choices from integer-number options.

Sure, but have you ever taken a poll that is not discrete?

[LastFootnote]

Sure, but have you ever taken a poll that is not discrete?

That would be awesome. "How much of this water would you drink?"

[GendoIkari]

*Discreet*, dammit.  Damn that pisses me off.

. ?

This poll has its answers hidden.  That makes it discreet (secret).  "Discrete" is the opposite of continuous.

To be fair, the poll is also discrete; you can only choose an integer-number of choices from integer-number options.

Sure, but have you ever taken a poll that is not discrete?

Ah, after you answer the poll, you no longer see that text, so I couldn't see the text when I read your post.

[Erick648]

How about a discreet discrete diss Crete poll?

Which of the following is the worst thing about Crete? (all responses are hidden)

[Eran of Arcadia]

How about a discreet discrete diss Crete poll?

I feel honor-bound to tell you that I'm stealing that joke.