Print

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

[Jeebus]

If I gain a BoM/Overlord and draw it and play it the same turn as a Duration, and then you Smuggle it, you gain a copy of the card it's emulating, right?
I wonder if Dominion Online gets this right.

[dane-m]

If I gain a BoM/Overlord and draw it and play it the same turn as a Duration, and then you Smuggle it, you gain a copy of the card it's emulating, right?
I wonder if Dominion Online gets this right.

I can understand your thought processes, but I'm confident that you must be wrong.  Quite apart from the fact that Smugglers says to gain a copy of the card that was gained (as opposed to gaining a copy of whatever the card that was gained is currently emulating), in principle there's no way for players to know which BoM/Overlord is which after the discard pile has been shuffled to become the deck so there's no way to know what the gained BoM/Overlord is currently emulating.

[Joseph2302]

Agree. So if you smuggle in this instance, you smuggle a BoM/Overlord.

[Jeebus]

If I gain a BoM/Overlord and draw it and play it the same turn as a Duration, and then you Smuggle it, you gain a copy of the card it's emulating, right?
I wonder if Dominion Online gets this right.

I can understand your thought processes, but I'm confident that you must be wrong.  Quite apart from the fact that Smugglers says to gain a copy of the card that was gained (as opposed to gaining a copy of whatever the card that was gained is currently emulating), in principle there's no way for players to know which BoM/Overlord is which after the discard pile has been shuffled to become the deck so there's no way to know what the gained BoM/Overlord is currently emulating.

Right, I think I'm wrong too. I mean, you could gain the BoM to your hand with Transmogrify and then play it, making it very clear what card it was (well, not really for all players if you have several cards in hand)...
I was thinking about the fact that Smugglers looks at the current cost of the card, not caring what the cost was when it was gained, and thinking the same applies to the name of the card. Hmm...

[LastFootnote]

Agree. So if you smuggle in this instance, you smuggle a BoM/Overlord.

Well, except you can't smuggle an Overlord. But yes.

[Haddock]

If I gain a BoM/Overlord and draw it and play it the same turn as a Duration, and then you Smuggle it, you gain a copy of the card it's emulating, right?
I wonder if Dominion Online gets this right.

I can understand your thought processes, but I'm confident that you must be wrong.  Quite apart from the fact that Smugglers says to gain a copy of the card that was gained (as opposed to gaining a copy of whatever the card that was gained is currently emulating), in principle there's no way for players to know which BoM/Overlord is which after the discard pile has been shuffled to become the deck so there's no way to know what the gained BoM/Overlord is currently emulating.

Right, I think I'm wrong too. I mean, you could gain the BoM to your hand with Transmogrify and then play it, making it very clear what card it was (well, not really for all players if you have several cards in hand)...
I was thinking about the fact that Smugglers looks at the current cost of the card, not caring what the cost was when it was gained, and thinking the same applies to the name of the card. Hmm...

I guess it cares about the cost of the COPY of the card.

[Jeebus]

Right, it should just be BoM, not Overlord.

I guess Smugglers must be different from Disciple.

Disciple: You may play an Action card from your hand twice. Gain a copy of it.
Smugglers: Gain a copy of a card costing up to $6 that the player to your right gained on his last turn.

On Disciple, "it" must mean "the card you played", but is still referring to whatever the card is now.
So in theory, Smugglers should also refer to whatever the card is now. However, what it is now is impossible to know. So I guess it means that Smugglers refers to what the card was when it was gained.

[Donald X.]

So in theory, Smugglers should also refer to whatever the card is now. However, what it is now is impossible to know. So I guess it means that Smugglers refers to what the card was when it was gained.

Smugglers refers to the card that was gained; it doesn't care at all about what that card is now. It doesn't care what the specific physical card costs now either (if an effect changed the cost of some copies of a card but not others).

[GendoIkari]

So in theory, Smugglers should also refer to whatever the card is now. However, what it is now is impossible to know. So I guess it means that Smugglers refers to what the card was when it was gained.

Smugglers refers to the card that was gained; it doesn't care at all about what that card is now. It doesn't care what the specific physical card costs now either (if an effect changed the cost of some copies of a card but not others).

Is there a wording difference reason that Disciple doesn't work the same way in regards to gaining the card that was played?

[dane-m]

Smugglers refers to the card that was gained; it doesn't care at all about what that card is now. It doesn't care what the specific physical card costs now either (if an effect changed the cost of some copies of a card but not others).

Is there a wording difference reason that Disciple doesn't work the same way in regards to gaining the card that was played?

It will be interesting to see what Donald says, but my feeling is that the difference isn't because of wording but because of what Disciple can do.  It can look at a specific card (in the sense of a piece of thick paper) to see what its current identity is.  Smugglers can't.  It can only remember the identity of the card when it was gained.  Unfortunately there doesn't seem to be anything in the Adventures rulebook to support my opinion.

[Donald X.]

So in theory, Smugglers should also refer to whatever the card is now. However, what it is now is impossible to know. So I guess it means that Smugglers refers to what the card was when it was gained.

Smugglers refers to the card that was gained; it doesn't care at all about what that card is now. It doesn't care what the specific physical card costs now either (if an effect changed the cost of some copies of a card but not others).

Is there a wording difference reason that Disciple doesn't work the same way in regards to gaining the card that was played?

Cards do not get special phrasings to try to arrange for the best possible results when a card turns out to have transformed into another card. It's an exotic situation and as always the game needs to have friendly wordings.

Smugglers has this very basic question of cost. I buy Province with two Bridges out, does the other player get to Smuggle it, or do they need their own Bridges or what. It's so blatant of a question that the Seaside rulebook answers it. So, aside from any wording issues, I have a ruling there that I would really like to stick to. Smugglers as interpreted looks at what happened on a previous turn; pick a card they gained, gain a copy of it, btw it has to cost $6 or less. That's the intention; thus the ruling on cost in the Seaside rulebook. Thus me matching that for non-cost things like "what card is it now."

By default cards referring to "it" where "it" is some card just mentioned, refer to the card as it is now, if the card somehow changes right then, which is not normal but can happen. So Disciple looks at the current card.

[chipperMDW]

So in theory, Smugglers should also refer to whatever the card is now. However, what it is now is impossible to know. So I guess it means that Smugglers refers to what the card was when it was gained.

Smugglers refers to the card that was gained; it doesn't care at all about what that card is now. It doesn't care what the specific physical card costs now either (if an effect changed the cost of some copies of a card but not others).

Is there a wording difference reason that Disciple doesn't work the same way in regards to gaining the card that was played?

Cards do not get special phrasings to try to arrange for the best possible results when a card turns out to have transformed into another card. It's an exotic situation and as always the game needs to have friendly wordings.

Smugglers has this very basic question of cost. I buy Province with two Bridges out, does the other player get to Smuggle it, or do they need their own Bridges or what. It's so blatant of a question that the Seaside rulebook answers it. So, aside from any wording issues, I have a ruling there that I would really like to stick to. Smugglers as interpreted looks at what happened on a previous turn; pick a card they gained, gain a copy of it, btw it has to cost $6 or less. That's the intention; thus the ruling on cost in the Seaside rulebook. Thus me matching that for non-cost things like "what card is it now."

By default cards referring to "it" where "it" is some card just mentioned, refer to the card as it is now, if the card somehow changes right then, which is not normal but can happen. So Disciple looks at the current card.

If I'm understanding correctly that the cost at the time of the gain is what matters, then it seems like that would be a change from these earlier rulings:

https://boardgamegeek.com/article/4119438#4119438
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/4119500#4119500
https://boardgamegeek.com/article/10576349#10576349


EDIT:
Or it's possible I'm misunderstanding what you meant when you said you were "matching [the Seaside rulebook's ruling on cost] for non-cost things."

[Donald X.]

If I'm understanding correctly that the cost at the time of the gain is what matters, then it seems like that would be a change from these earlier rulings:

The cost at the time of the other player's gain does not matter, just as the Seaside rulebook says. The cost at the time of your gain is what matters. Smugglers limits what you gain and does not remember what the card the other player gained cost, just what its name was. We don't look at the physical card the other player gained, now, to see its cost; we also don't look at the physical card the other player gained, now, to see its current name.

[werothegreat]

There's no blue-dogging with Smugglers.  There's no "it" that needs to be specified.

[chipperMDW]

The cost at the time of the other player's gain does not matter, just as the Seaside rulebook says. The cost at the time of your gain is what matters.

Ok, good, everything makes sense again.  But I guess I'm not seeing where you're saying it actually says this in the Seaside rulebook.  All I see is the bit that was confusing people in that second BGG thread I linked where you called it "regrettable."  Is the version on RGG's website the most up-to-date one, or is there a further clarification in a later version?

Smugglers limits what you gain and does not remember what the card the other player gained cost, just what its name was. We don't look at the physical card the other player gained, now, to see its cost; we also don't look at the physical card the other player gained, now, to see its current name.

I think I worked out what you meant by "matching."  Suffice it to say that I thought you were talking about matching different things than you were.

[Donald X.]

Ok, good, everything makes sense again.  But I guess I'm not seeing where you're saying it actually says this in the Seaside rulebook.  All I see is the bit that was confusing people in that second BGG thread I linked where you called it "regrettable."  Is the version on RGG's website the most up-to-date one, or is there a further clarification in a later version?

You are right, it is not in the rulebook. I do not always have the rulebooks as handy as might be uh handy.

[Beyond Awesome]

To best answer the OP, you gain a BoM because that's what your opponent gained. When BoM becomes another card, that emulated card was never gained. Thus, you gain a BoM because thst is all you can Smuggle assuming the other player did not gain anything else.