Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9  All

Author Topic: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks  (Read 92321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #175 on: October 13, 2019, 05:31:14 pm »
0

I had mentioned this in the discord, but does Scepter qualify as a Command type? The only reason it doesn't loop is because it can't play itself due to being a treasure and no other command cards can play it. Effectively, Scepter treats the play area as an "infinite supply". If ever a card was released that can replay a treasure in play or that can put Scepter's abilities on an action, a loop would be created.

Maybe it's better to cross that bridge if it ever gets there, but I do want Scepter to get recognition as a potential problem card that in its current form limits (albeit narrow) design space.

Command cards seem to be cards that override the default rule of moving the played card into play. If Scepter is a Command card, then all kinds of cards should be, like Royal Carriage and even Throne Room and Vassal.

Throne room and vassal both move a card into play, and can't go off without moving a physical card. Royal Carriage is a special case because it's "replay a card" is not an on-play ability of its own at all, and instead a call effect, which requires the Royal Carriage to move.

Edit: genuinely curious as an aside, can Scepter play a Royal Carriage that was played and called on the same turn?
« Last Edit: October 13, 2019, 05:36:31 pm by markusin »
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1204
  • Respect: +1355
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #176 on: October 13, 2019, 05:35:54 pm »
+1

Hunh, interesting.  I'd always thought of that as simply what the card is worth rather than something the card "does".  Ironic that I discover my understanding was wrong just when it ceases to be relevant!

I doubt it'll ever be relevant, but would that mean that, e.g., gold being worth 3 coins also counts as an ability?

Yeah, of course it does. Gold could also validly be printed as a treasure card that said "3" in a circle below a picture instead of the way the card looks now (e.g., it would look like Cache without the below-the-line text). Wouldn't you say Cache's ability is that it generates 3 coins when you play it? Gold is the same thing.

Well, I would've considered Cache the same thing - a treasure card that's worth 3 coins.  But, I get it now.  So, basically, it's not "worth" 3 coins, it "generates" 3 coins in the buy phase, and estates likewise aren't "worth" 1 VP, they "generate" 1 VP at the end of the game.  So, basically, treasure cards are functionally the same as action cards with +$3 (or whatever) except that they're played in the buy phase, and victory cards are "played" at the end of the game.  I get it now, that just didn't seem intuitive to me.  But it is logical also
Logged
They/them

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #177 on: October 13, 2019, 05:38:59 pm »
0

Hunh, interesting.  I'd always thought of that as simply what the card is worth rather than something the card "does".  Ironic that I discover my understanding was wrong just when it ceases to be relevant!

I doubt it'll ever be relevant, but would that mean that, e.g., gold being worth 3 coins also counts as an ability?

Yeah, of course it does. Gold could also validly be printed as a treasure card that said "3" in a circle below a picture instead of the way the card looks now (e.g., it would look like Cache without the below-the-line text). Wouldn't you say Cache's ability is that it generates 3 coins when you play it? Gold is the same thing.

Well, I would've considered Cache the same thing - a treasure card that's worth 3 coins.  But, I get it now.  So, basically, it's not "worth" 3 coins, it "generates" 3 coins in the buy phase, and estates likewise aren't "worth" 1 VP, they "generate" 1 VP at the end of the game.  So, basically, treasure cards are functionally the same as action cards with +$3 (or whatever) except that they're played in the buy phase, and victory cards are "played" at the end of the game.  I get it now, that just didn't seem intuitive to me.  But it is logical also

No one can blame you for this, considering that Fool's Gold literally uses the word "worth" when referencing it's coin generation, even though it could have just said "+$1...+$4".
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #178 on: October 13, 2019, 05:54:29 pm »
+1

I had mentioned this in the discord, but does Scepter qualify as a Command type? The only reason it doesn't loop is because it can't play itself due to being a treasure and no other command cards can play it. Effectively, Scepter treats the play area as an "infinite supply". If ever a card was released that can replay a treasure in play or that can put Scepter's abilities on an action, a loop would be created.

Maybe it's better to cross that bridge if it ever gets there, but I do want Scepter to get recognition as a potential problem card that in its current form limits (albeit narrow) design space.

Command cards seem to be cards that override the default rule of moving the played card into play. If Scepter is a Command card, then all kinds of cards should be, like Royal Carriage and even Throne Room and Vassal.

So, I think it's not enough to decide what a Command card is based on if it overrides the default of moving a played card into play. We can be specific and say:

Command cards are cards that, when played, can play another card without moving that other card at all.

This exempts Throne Room, Vassal, etc. from being called a Command card, because they all need another card to move in order to work. Even Necromancer moves the card it plays; it moves it from face up to face down, and that specific movement is a requirement for playing the card. Royal Carriage gets exempted because, while it doesn't move the card it plays, it's "throne" effect is not an on-play ability of Royal Carriage itself, and is instead a Call ability (which requires RC move a certain way).

Scepter is the card that, under the definition I gave above, would not be exempted from being called a "Command" card. It doesn't move the card it plays, and that effect can be invoked without moving Scepter. It's just that no card currently exists that can invoke Scepter's effect without moving Scepter, and this all thanks to Scepter being exclusively a Treasure.
Logged

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2532
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1643
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #179 on: October 13, 2019, 06:02:15 pm »
+1

TR can play a card from the trash (a trashed Mining Village), so it works without moving the card. Necromancer flipping a card does not constitute movement; the card is still in trash.

I get why you say that Scepter could end up needing something to limit it, but I think calling it a Command card is not the way to go.

In answer to your question, Donald has ruled that Scepter can't play a Royal Carriage that was played and called on the same turn. Same with Duplicate.

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #180 on: October 14, 2019, 02:29:37 am »
0

TR can play a card from the trash (a trashed Mining Village), so it works without moving the card. Necromancer flipping a card does not constitute movement; the card is still in trash.

I get why you say that Scepter could end up needing something to limit it, but I think calling it a Command card is not the way to go.

In answer to your question, Donald has ruled that Scepter can't play a Royal Carriage that was played and called on the same turn. Same with Duplicate.

I was thinking, Throne room can play a card that enterered the trash in the middle of its resolution, but the initial target you pick for Throne Room has to be in hand, and so at least one thing will move from your hand to the play area every time you play Throne Room.

Necromancer flipping cards is not movement in the Dominion sense, but it's a state change that is required to happen, and it's there to prevent loops. It moved from being face up in the trash to face down in the trash.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 02:31:01 am by markusin »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #181 on: October 14, 2019, 04:12:01 am »
0

I doubt it'll ever be relevant, but would that mean that, e.g., gold being worth 3 coins also counts as an ability?
Yes, it's just like +$3.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #182 on: October 14, 2019, 04:16:54 am »
0

I may have missed it, but I didn't see people complaining about the loop; only about the mandatory loop due to the fact that it created a hole in the rules where there was no correct defined behavior. Did people complain about this one more than they do about infinite Moat, or the various infinite Villa shenanigans?
Most of the online Dominion traffic that I know about is on the discord these days, followed by reddit, then f.ds, then BGG. Well not counting variants stuff, I don't read that stuff and so don't know how much of it there is. Anyway if you want to spend more time talking about Dominion, start by checking out the discord.

People do not complain about Moat. I don't have a good mental picture for how much they've complained about Villa; what I chose to store there was memories of people loving Villa. They certainly complained about Captain / BoM.

Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #183 on: October 14, 2019, 04:34:38 am »
+2

So now that there is a new type, I have a suggestion for all five cards, because I think it would be better and cleaner if they worked the same way.

As I said earlier in this thread, I think they should all say non-Duration, or we can just live with the lack of tracking for these cards. But since Donald is obviously going to stick to the special tracking rules for these cards, I think it would be better to make them all consistent.

The new rule ("2. Tracking for the former shapeshifters") mentions all cards - Band of Misfits, Overlord, Inheritance, Necromancer and Captain - but actually doesn't currently apply to the last two, since they already say "non-Duration" and so cause no tracking problem. This rule also presents the challenge (mentioned earlier) of defining which cards it applies to without including cards like Throne Room. This can be fixed with awkward wordings.

My suggestion is to add the Command type to Necromancer, and change Inheritance so that Estates also get the Command type; and then drop "non-Duration" from Captain and Necromancer. Now all five cards work the same way, they can play Durations with the exact same tracking, and they can't play each other. And the tracking rule can simply refer to "Command cards".
Rule 2 is there to tell people about the changes; the actual rulebook location for rule 2 would be in each relevant card's FAQ. It wouldn't have a special section in a rulebook because it's not something I want anyone to see unless they are specifically looking up a relevant card. There's no challenge of which cards it applies to, it would apply to the cards that explained it. It's not challenging to me either, it's cards that play cards that aren't put into play. Throne Room for example does not do that; it can fail to put the card into play e.g. when playing a one-shot the second time, but it always tries to put the card into play. I guess we can say, do we count Scepter and Royal Carriage, which only play cards already in play; their tracking is already covered and I wasn't defining new behavior for them.

The problem with consistency here is loud voices on the internet complaining about cards losing functionality. If I were making the cards all from scratch, new cards for new expansions, then I mean I would fix them up every way I could, I would avoid having a phrase like "non-duration, non-command Action" (even though Magic has done that on commons from the beginning, I am just mentioning that due to the injustice of having this be compared to substance) and so on. The direction of "give them a type and exclude it" is not an unreasonable approach, again for the situation of making these cards for the first time ever; it makes sure you don't have a problem. If I get to go further back and do e.g. duration cards and one-shots differently, well in addition to probably doing something like saying, duration cards don't function if they aren't in play (and notating that well), odds are I wouldn't do Band of Misfits, because I would want effects to be tracked better than it can manage.

But, the actual situation is, I made some cards, and have to live with them; even if a future version of Dark Ages replaces Band of Misfits, the card exists and needs rules. And again there are those loud voices. It's no surprise that people don't like to see combos go away, even if they'd never miss them if they'd never had them. The ideal fixes are ones that change as little as possible.

Thus, not adding Command to Necromancer, which didn't need it. For Estate, that's more borderline, and I can reconsider it when actually reprinting Adventures. Putting the type on Estate is cumbersome on the card text, but adds extra protection, as demonstrated by, if we drop "once per game" then you can Inherit something and then Inherit Estate, which is bad.

Similarly I initially thought Band of Misfits would get non-Duration. People were happier with that not happening. We have tracking for that situation and so it doesn't say non-Duration. In the best of all possible worlds, I just don't do the card; in the weird nightmare world where I have to do Band of Misfits but get to change it before it goes to print, and can't just make it e.g. "choose one: village or smithy or something," well, I would consider non-Duration. I'm not in that world, I'm in this one, where people are used to Band of Misfits working on Duration cards and would be sad if I took that away.

I do agree that it would be nice if the rules could just mention Command cards.

To sum up! It would be nice if the cards all fell into line more; they don't because I care more about the players being happy than about the cards being their prettiest.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #184 on: October 14, 2019, 04:44:37 am »
0

I had mentioned this in the discord, but does Scepter qualify as a Command type? The only reason it doesn't loop is because it can't play itself due to being a treasure and no other command cards can play it. Effectively, Scepter treats the play area as an "infinite supply". If ever a card was released that can replay a treasure in play or that can put Scepter's abilities on an action, a loop would be created.

Maybe it's better to cross that bridge if it ever gets there, but I do want Scepter to get recognition as a potential problem card that in its current form limits (albeit narrow) design space.

Edit: in a sense, Scepter presents precedence for protecting against unwanted loops through use of types. There are no simple "Command" loops with Scepter because none of the other "Command" cards can play a treasure, and Scepter is only a treasure. So, Scepter fails to make the "whitelist" of any Command cards by virtue of its type. The "Command" type also allows type to protect from loops, except does so by allowing cards to "Blacklist" Command cards rather than somehow excluding them from another Command card's whitelist.
Scepter is a potential problem, for sure. If I made an Action that replayed a Treasure in play, they'd be a loop. That sounds like a weird card, but it also doesn't make you immediately think, "oh that will cause trouble."

As I've said, each expansion is trying to somehow still have new things. So at some point I tried each of these problematic things that made it out (and of course other things that didn't, e.g. modifying numbers in text). Replaying a card in play is trouble; moving a card from play (Mandarin, Procession, Bonfire) is trouble; playing a card without putting something into play is trouble. At the root of these all, there's this idea that a card in play represents a thing that happened; some situations get a lot safer and saner if I address that at the root... but it's too significant of a change at this point.

It's hard to commit to just not making cards again in any of the problem categories; what will happen is, I've got the idea and everyone loves it and it seems like, some clause is protecting us. And then maybe it is and maybe it isn't. But, a good rule of thumb is, really try not to make any more cards in the problem categories.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #185 on: October 14, 2019, 04:56:40 am »
+1

So, I think it's not enough to decide what a Command card is based on if it overrides the default of moving a played card into play. We can be specific and say:

Command cards are cards that, when played, can play another card without moving that other card at all.
The definition is: Command cards are cards with the Command type. It's a word on the bottom of the card, or maybe someday granted by Inheritance. That's what Command cards are. And you can't Moat an Ill-Gotten Gains, if you see what I mean.

The idea is to use this type on the cards that create loops due to not actually putting a card into play when they play something. It's a new thing of course; only recently the only example was Necromancer. But then the idea is to also not have shapeshifters as they are super-confusing and have their own problems. Anyway your definition is nice, it's a good guide to, what will I actually put the word on. But like, the actual rulebook text is just the part of e.g. the BoM FAQ that says, what's that weird word Command mean, and the answer is, some cards like BoM have that word, and can't play each other to avoid loops. I don't need to say there what precisely gets the word; that's not information that does anything.

And my hope is that, just looking at the card, it will at least not seem like a complete non sequitur due to the card being a Command card. It's a Command card, it can't play Command cards, if it could play itself that would be a loop, maybe there's some sense to this. [Yes so far on Inheritance it's just a non sequitur.]
Logged

spineflu

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1365
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • Head Empty, Heart Worms, Can't Lose
  • Respect: +1353
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #186 on: October 14, 2019, 09:21:13 am »
0

is this errata coming out because the rumored early 2020 dominion expansion set has cards this is pertinent to?

or is it more bc you're tired of our kvetching about it?

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2532
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1643
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #187 on: October 14, 2019, 10:28:03 am »
0

Command cards are cards that, when played, can play another card without moving that other card at all.

I was thinking, Throne room can play a card that enterered the trash in the middle of its resolution, but the initial target you pick for Throne Room has to be in hand, and so at least one thing will move from your hand to the play area every time you play Throne Room.

Necromancer flipping cards is not movement in the Dominion sense, but it's a state change that is required to happen, and it's there to prevent loops. It moved from being face up in the trash to face down in the trash.

The definition is not clear from the wording. You mean that the other card won't move at all during the resolution, but literally it just says that the other card is played without moving at all. That can happen with Throne Room. It can also happen with Vassal + Faithful Hound (but it's like TR in that the Vassal does move the Hound during its resolution).

Your definition in any case does include Necromancer.

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2532
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1643
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #188 on: October 14, 2019, 10:38:05 am »
0

To sum up! It would be nice if the cards all fell into line more; they don't because I care more about the players being happy than about the cards being their prettiest.

Thanks for your long explanation. However, I'm not convinced! (I know, I'm not the one that needs to be convinced.)

Making it consistent in the way I suggested would only remove a few interactions (Command cards being able to play Necromancer and Inherited Estate), but would add many more interactions (Captain and Necromancer being able to play any Duration). How can these loud voices complain about that, they should be deliriously happy instead!

As you know, you get a more cumbersome Inheritance, but a less cumbersome Captain (and slightly less cumbersome Necromancer).
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 01:10:22 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3846
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2437
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #189 on: October 14, 2019, 12:20:19 pm »
0

Command cards are cards that, when played, can play another card without moving that other card at all.

I was thinking, Throne room can play a card that enterered the trash in the middle of its resolution, but the initial target you pick for Throne Room has to be in hand, and so at least one thing will move from your hand to the play area every time you play Throne Room.

Necromancer flipping cards is not movement in the Dominion sense, but it's a state change that is required to happen, and it's there to prevent loops. It moved from being face up in the trash to face down in the trash.

The definition is not clear from the wording. You mean that the other card won't move at all during the resolution, but literally it just says that the other card is played without moving at all. That can happen with Throne Room. It can also happen with Vassal + Faithful Hound (but it's like TR in that the Vassal does move the Hound during its resolution).

Your definition in any case does include Necromancer.

I mean, when you consider every point of the card's resolution (e.g. Throne Room), there was never a point where one of the cards it plays wasn't first moved to the play area earlier in the resolution. So, the second time Throne Room plays a card, it doesn't move, but the first time it plays a card, the card had to have moved to the play area from hand, and that second play of the card could not have happened otherwise.

Necromancer doesn't change a card's zone, but it changes its state within that zone (the trash pile) in a meaningful way (face down, cannot be played by Necromancer). To me that's counts as moving by a Non-Dominion definition.

I guess you raise a point about Faithful Hound, but at least it's trying to move the card into play. Overlord for example never tried to move the cards it commands into play.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 12:23:44 pm by markusin »
Logged

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2532
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1643
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #190 on: October 14, 2019, 12:42:54 pm »
0

I mean, when you consider every point of the card's resolution (e.g. Throne Room), there was never a point where one of the cards it plays wasn't first moved to the play area earlier in the resolution. So, the second time Throne Room plays a card, it doesn't move, but the first time it plays a card, the card had to have moved to the play area from hand, and that second play of the card could not have happened otherwise.

Necromancer doesn't change a card's zone, but it changes its state within that zone (the trash pile) in a meaningful way (face down, cannot be played by Necromancer). To me that's counts as moving by a Non-Dominion definition.

I guess you raise a point about Faithful Hound, but at least it's trying to move the card into play. Overlord for example never tried to move the cards it commands into play.

My point from the start was that these five cards never try to move the card they play, and that is their distinguishing characteristic. They override that rule. No other card does that. Like Vassal, Throne Room tries to move the card into play when it plays it from the trash, so if "not trying" is enough for you, you don't need to say anything about "moving the other card". You need instead to say that the card plays another card without trying to put it into play - or that the card tells you to play a card without putting it into play - or something like that. That will include Necromancer, but so does your definition - according to Dominion's rules.

You could find a definition that includes these 5 cards (including Necromancer and Inherited Estates) plus Scepter, but I think it would need a very awkward wording, and I'm not sure it wouldn't break with some future card.

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #191 on: October 14, 2019, 12:49:47 pm »
+2

is this errata coming out because the rumored early 2020 dominion expansion set has cards this is pertinent to?

or is it more bc you're tired of our kvetching about it?
Normally errata would wait for the relevant expansions. Since the cards aren't all in one expansion, I would have said something whenever the first expansion came out. Let's say it was Dark Ages. So, okay Band of Misfits is different, and hey Overlord will match. I would have said.

But, there are people programming a Dominion app. I didn't want them to have to program the old Band of Misfits and then the new one. So they had to have the errata in a timely fashion. And while I don't have a release date for their version, the contract lets them put it out as early as January. So the errata wanted to be out by January, which would be ahead of e.g. Dark Ages being reprinted. So there was no perfect time for it and it might as well happen as soon as I had it. At the same time there's an existing online version (that isn't going away, I mean yes maybe someday but not in January), and it would have the errata.

So, I posted the errata. Then that led to enough online discussion of it that I errata'd the errata.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #192 on: October 14, 2019, 01:00:25 pm »
0

Making it consistent in the way I suggested would only remove a few interactions (Command cards being able to play Necromancer and Inherited Estate), but would add many more interactions (Captain and Necromancer being able to play any Duration). How can these loud voices complain about that, they should be deliriously happy instead!

As you know, you get a more cumbersome Inheritance, but a less cumbersome Captain (and slightly less cumbersome Necromancer).
I like Captain saying non-Duration. It's not a feature of Band of Misfits that it can play Duration cards; it's something I'm sucking up because I want to be friendly to players. I don't need to be so friendly as to add functionality to Captain.

Inherited Estate being a Command card is not bad, the downside is just having to say that on Inheritance. Again I can keep thinking about that for when Adventures actually gets reprinted. It doesn't feel urgent. Necromancer being a Command card merely stops you from using e.g. Band of Misfits on it; but that's not some exotic combo that will never happen, it's useful just with those two cards on the board.

Originally the changes were going to include this great rule that you couldn't play a card if you'd lost track of it. This was a different fix for majiponi's "I play Estate and don't know what it does" scenario. It seemed like a nice rule all-around. But it meant that e.g. Throning a one-shot would no longer work. At first I thought that was a positive. Throne / Feast was the number one rules question in the early days of Dominion. Surely it was more intuitive if you couldn't do it. But I asked people who wouldn't know, and more thought you could than that you couldn't; it wasn't intuitive either way, but if anything was more intuitive as it is. Further, people learn "do as much as you can" and then those people are much more likely to think you can Throne a Feast. So the change didn't seem so great after all.

But in the meantime, LastFootnote told someone he knew about it, that probably Throne / one-shot would stop working, and that person said, that's it, I'm quitting Dominion. I don't think that's a rational response! And if someone's going to be crazy, it's not like I can hope to appease them. But, maybe this gives you an idea of how strongly people can feel about changes. I changed as little as I could.
Logged

Jeebus

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2532
  • Shuffle iT Username: jeebus
  • Respect: +1643
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #193 on: October 14, 2019, 01:23:08 pm »
0

Necromancer being a Command card merely stops you from using e.g. Band of Misfits on it; but that's not some exotic combo that will never happen, it's useful just with those two cards on the board.

Right, in my suggestion it was mainly for cleanness and consistency (including opening up for playing Durations). However, it would stop you from playing BoM, Necro from supply, BoM from trash, and then the same Necro from supply. Not that that would be a problem, but it's kind of a loophole in that it's now the only way to play the same card from supply twice.

But if you were to change Inheritance, which you are considering, then that would also stop a two-card combo, BoM playing Inherited Estate. But I guess your reasoning is that it's more acceptable than changing Necromancer because it would have more potential benefits in terms of stopping loops.
« Last Edit: October 14, 2019, 01:24:27 pm by Jeebus »
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #194 on: October 14, 2019, 03:17:17 pm »
0

Necromancer being a Command card merely stops you from using e.g. Band of Misfits on it; but that's not some exotic combo that will never happen, it's useful just with those two cards on the board.

Right, in my suggestion it was mainly for cleanness and consistency (including opening up for playing Durations). However, it would stop you from playing BoM, Necro from supply, BoM from trash, and then the same Necro from supply. Not that that would be a problem, but it's kind of a loophole in that it's now the only way to play the same card from supply twice.
No they all do that, e.g. Band of Misfits to play Supply Throne Room to play another Band of Misfits from hand to play the same Supply Throne Room.

But if you were to change Inheritance, which you are considering, then that would also stop a two-card combo, BoM playing Inherited Estate. But I guess your reasoning is that it's more acceptable than changing Necromancer because it would have more potential benefits in terms of stopping loops.
It conceivably has a benefit, plus published Band of Misfits could never play inherited Estate.
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 339
  • Respect: +446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #195 on: October 16, 2019, 03:16:32 pm »
0

I like most of the tweaks a lot, but there are some gripes I have with some of them:
a) The change to Inheritance. I dislike it. I think it's unelegant, and also makes it incompatible with Reserves, something that was never a problem to begin with. Personally, I'd say something like "During your turns, Estates gain the types and abilities of the inherited card", and perhaps also forbid Reaction cards. (I suppose this alternative is also imperfect)
b) You had clear reasons for not enabling Captain and Necromancer with Durations. Personally, I think BoM and Overlord should be restricted from those as well. It'd also prevents Captain from being part of any socalled "loop" and honestly, a throned Overlord could definitely cause tracking issues as well.
c) I'm not too keen on the whole Command thing. It just feels so... deceptive.
d) Why no Prince errata?

Also, the Inheritance interaction from http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18598.0 is Mandarin's doing. Isn't it better to just tweek Mandarin itself, or not consider that card anymore?

Not to badmouth anything, Donald's work is beyond amazing and I understand that these decisions are very hard.

EDIT: I see b has been considered, but ultimately been declined, and that c has very obvious reasons to be done. Probably should spend more time reading a tread before replying on it lol. My opinions still stand though.
« Last Edit: October 16, 2019, 04:13:53 pm by grrgrrgrr »
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 339
  • Respect: +446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #196 on: October 16, 2019, 03:22:22 pm »
0

Just curious, but have you considered making Command a widespread type for all cards that make you play another card? Command cards would be: Throne Room, King's Court, Vassal, Herald, and so on. Then there could be a set of rules for Command cards just like there is one for Duration cards.
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 339
  • Respect: +446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #197 on: October 16, 2019, 03:25:42 pm »
0

I accept this is a digression, but why is Inheritance once per game? Just to deal with the ambiguity concerning what would happen to the previous set-aside card, or for some aspect of game balance I've never appreciated?
When I first printed out Inheritance, it did not say once-per-game. After some games with it, LastFootnote pointed out that you could e.g. Inherit Dungeon, play an Estate, then that turn buy Inheritance gain and Inherit a non-Duration card. What happens to the Estate? There were a few weird situations like that, and once-per-game got rid of them.

With the new wording, once-per-game protects us from you Inheriting something, then Inheriting Estate.

Mmm, really surprised that that is the reason. I though it was for balance purposes. I mean, turning one set of actions into another is incredibly powerful.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #198 on: October 16, 2019, 06:13:23 pm »
+2

a) The change to Inheritance. I dislike it. I think it's unelegant, and also makes it incompatible with Reserves, something that was never a problem to begin with. Personally, I'd say something like "During your turns, Estates gain the types and abilities of the inherited card", and perhaps also forbid Reaction cards. (I suppose this alternative is also imperfect)
Work went into that wording. It's not just some random thing; other stuff was considered, found fault with, and rejected. For example if Inheritance changes all cards on your turn, then your opponent could Inherit Amulet, and you Inherit Caravan Guard, and on your turn you play an Attack and they play an Estate as a Caravan Guard, and now on their turn the Estate is in play and it's an Amulet and uh what's going on here? Or, your opponent could Inherit Ratcatcher, you Inherit Duplicate, and on your turn you buy Messenger for Magpies and your opponent calls their Estate as a Duplicate.

Possibly Inheritance could have changed all copies of the card, if it also limited you to Action cards with no other types.

b) You had clear reasons for not enabling Captain and Necromancer with Durations. Personally, I think BoM and Overlord should be restricted from those as well. It'd also prevents Captain from being part of any socalled "loop" and honestly, a throned Overlord could definitely cause tracking issues as well.
d) Why no Prince errata?
Look back some posts and there will be a story about someone ready to quit the game over throne / one-shot changing. I didn't have to change Prince so I didn't change it. I didn't have to add non-Duration to those cards so I didn't add it. Something being aesthetically displeasing was better than having interactions go away.

Also, the Inheritance interaction from http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18598.0 is Mandarin's doing. Isn't it better to just tweek Mandarin itself, or not consider that card anymore?
It's bad to have Mandarin / Bonfire / Procession exist; they remove a card from play that might have been tracking something important, and in exotic cases can let you replay a card which causes trouble too. That family of cards is a problem; the shapeshifter family was also a problem. The shapeshifter family endlessly produces rules questions, so it was good to fix anyway. It still might be worth fixing the Mandarin family, and there are things you can for Mandarin and Bonfire provided I don't make new cards that seem innocent but break the fixes. Those fixes of course would have unhappy players too. Procession is trickier, trashing an action from play is a basic part of what it does. You could delay the trashing until clean-up, do it like Improve, but there would be some sad players, it's a significant feature of Procession now that it gains a card you might play the same turn.

The thing to be unhappy about is the original mistakes, that I actually put Band of Misfits etc. into sets as printed. The best fix is not having the cards, but we have an obligation to support them; even if new versions of Dark Ages just replaced Band of Misfits with a new card (which would have to be available in an update pack), the rules would still need to handle Band of Misfits. So I was stuck somehow picking errata for it. I didn't have the option of saying, "that's not elegant so I won't do it."
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6382
  • Respect: +25753
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« Reply #199 on: October 16, 2019, 06:16:09 pm »
+1

Just curious, but have you considered making Command a widespread type for all cards that make you play another card? Command cards would be: Throne Room, King's Court, Vassal, Herald, and so on. Then there could be a set of rules for Command cards just like there is one for Duration cards.
No, same thing as before, I'm trying to avoid changing things I don't have to. I'll still allow myself small beneficial changes like the one on Moneylender, which happened to no fanfare and which of course people didn't mind.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9  All
 

Page created in 0.067 seconds with 21 queries.