Print

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

[mxdata]

In a game I just played online, my opponent had previously purchased Innovation. When they bought Skirmisher, they used Innovation to play it, and that caused me to have to discard. That seems like an error to me. Can Skirmisher really activate off its own gain?

[BBobb]

I'm not 100% sure, but when you gain a card, you get to choose the order of all on gain triggers. First, he chose Innovation, which causes it to be played. Then, since there is another on-gain trigger, that triggers, causing you to discard.

[GendoIkari]

This was actually discussed at length recently in this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21009

My current ruling is that Livery / Innovation gets you a Horse.

Skirmisher + Innovation should work just like Livery / Innovation.

[mxdata]

This was actually discussed at length recently in this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21009

My current ruling is that Livery / Innovation gets you a Horse.

Skirmisher + Innovation should work just like Livery / Innovation.

Oh, right, I remember that thread. It still seems completely illogical to me that the cards should work that way, but I guess that's correct after all

[Awaclus]

This was actually discussed at length recently in this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21009

My current ruling is that Livery / Innovation gets you a Horse.

Skirmisher + Innovation should work just like Livery / Innovation.

Oh, right, I remember that thread. It still seems completely illogical to me that the cards should work that way, but I guess that's correct after all

They have to work that way because you can use Reactions to draw more Reactions and there is no way to tell which Reactions were already in your hand and which ones you drew.

[GendoIkari]

This was actually discussed at length recently in this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21009

My current ruling is that Livery / Innovation gets you a Horse.

Skirmisher + Innovation should work just like Livery / Innovation.

Oh, right, I remember that thread. It still seems completely illogical to me that the cards should work that way, but I guess that's correct after all

They have to work that way because you can use Reactions to draw more Reactions and there is no way to tell which Reactions were already in your hand and which ones you drew.

It is consistent with the way it works for Reactions, but it didn't have to work that way even though Reactions do. It would have also made sense and not been contradictory with Reactions to rule that cards which set up delayed triggers like Priest, Skirmisher, Way of the Seal, and Livery only trigger for events that happen after the trigger was set up.

It doesn't require any sort of contradiction or change to how we think about trigger timing windows or reactions, it would have only required a rule that "this turn, when you trash a card" is interpreted as "when you trash a card between now and the end of turn".

[Awaclus]

It is consistent with the way it works for Reactions, but it didn't have to work that way even though Reactions do. It would have also made sense and not been contradictory with Reactions to rule that cards which set up delayed triggers like Priest, Skirmisher, Way of the Seal, and Livery only trigger for events that happen after the trigger was set up.

It doesn't require any sort of contradiction or change to how we think about trigger timing windows or reactions, it would have only required a rule that "this turn, when you trash a card" is interpreted as "when you trash a card between now and the end of turn".

I guess, but it would have required a rule. The actual way it works doesn't.

[mxdata]

This was actually discussed at length recently in this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21009

My current ruling is that Livery / Innovation gets you a Horse.

Skirmisher + Innovation should work just like Livery / Innovation.

Oh, right, I remember that thread. It still seems completely illogical to me that the cards should work that way, but I guess that's correct after all

They have to work that way because you can use Reactions to draw more Reactions and there is no way to tell which Reactions were already in your hand and which ones you drew.

Yeah, even that's a bit iffy in my mind (the player reacting knows which cards they drew, and it seems like there's easier ways to keep them honest), but I can follow that logic. But this isn't like that at all. There's no question that the Skirmisher was played after it was gained, and ditto for the Livery/Innovation question. But, if those are the rules, I guess I'll have to accept that. It's not like that's a particularly common combination to come up

[Awaclus]

Yeah, even that's a bit iffy in my mind (the player reacting knows which cards they drew, and it seems like there's easier ways to keep them honest), but I can follow that logic. But this isn't like that at all. There's no question that the Skirmisher was played after it was gained, and ditto for the Livery/Innovation question.

But there's also no question that the "when it was gained" window was still ongoing when the Skirmisher was played, as you could have definitely kept using other things that the gain triggered after that, like Sheepdogs, and Sheepdogs that you drew with other Sheepdogs after the gain.

[Jeebus]

But there's also no question that the "when it was gained" window was still ongoing when the Skirmisher was played, as you could have definitely kept using other things that the gain triggered after that, like Sheepdogs, and Sheepdogs that you drew with other Sheepdogs after the gain.

It's not exactly the same with Reactions (and some other cards) as with Livery, Skirmisher and Priest, and also cards like Goons and Haggler that need to be in play. That's probably why some people feel like it doesn't follow from the rule about Reactions.

The reason is that the trigger on Sheepdog has been true during the entire when-gain window, even though it enters your hand during the window. It's just "when you gain a card". But on Livery, it's "this turn, when you gain a card". We know that "this turn" means "starting from now and for the rest of this turn". It hadn't started yet when the window opened. The same goes for Goons that enters play during the when-buy window ("while this is in play").

Donald even initially ruled that Livery doesn't work. Of course, that would also have meant that Hireling played at start of turn shouldn't work, and the Goons/Haggler/etc. scenarios shouldn't work, and several others. Then he reversed that ruling.

Whether you think that Livery etc. follow naturally from the Reaction rule depends on how you view the rule. You probably view it as, "things keep triggering during the window". I used to too. The other way to think of it is, "things that triggered can keep being resolved during the window". It's clear that some people see it like that intuitively. After realizing this difference, I came to think that this second view is less of a leap in logic. But in any case, it required a ruling.

[Awaclus]

It's not exactly the same with Reactions (and some other cards) as with Livery, Skirmisher and Priest, and also cards like Goons and Haggler that need to be in play. That's probably why some people feel like it doesn't follow from the rule about Reactions.

The reason is that the trigger on Sheepdog has been true during the entire when-gain window, even though it enters your hand during the window. It's just "when you gain a card". But on Livery, it's "this turn, when you gain a card". We know that "this turn" means "starting from now and for the rest of this turn". It hadn't started yet when the window opened. The same goes for Goons that enters play during the when-buy window ("while this is in play").

Donald even initially ruled that Livery doesn't work. Of course, that would also have meant that Hireling played at start of turn shouldn't work, and the Goons/Haggler/etc. scenarios shouldn't work, and several others. Then he reversed that ruling.

Whether you think that Livery etc. follow naturally from the Reaction rule depends on how you view the rule. You probably view it as, "things keep triggering during the window". I used to too. The other way to think of it is, "things that triggered can keep being resolved during the window". It's clear that some people see it like that intuitively. After realizing this difference, I came to think that this second view is less of a leap in logic. But in any case, it required a ruling.

Well, if it was a question of things that already triggered being resolved, there wouldn't need to be a window. The thing would immediately trigger all of the triggers, and then you would just resolve them until there was nothing left to resolve.

[Jeebus]

Well, if it was a question of things that already triggered being resolved, there wouldn't need to be a window. The thing would immediately trigger all of the triggers, and then you would just resolve them until there was nothing left to resolve.

I see what you mean. But I think we would still need to talk about a window. For instance, when my opponent plays an Attack, I have a Horse Traders and a Diplomat in my hand, so those are the only two things on the list of what I can do. But as long as we are in the "window", I can add a Moat that I drew off the Diplomat.

[GendoIkari]

But there's also no question that the "when it was gained" window was still ongoing when the Skirmisher was played, as you could have definitely kept using other things that the gain triggered after that, like Sheepdogs, and Sheepdogs that you drew with other Sheepdogs after the gain.

It's not exactly the same with Reactions (and some other cards) as with Livery, Skirmisher and Priest, and also cards like Goons and Haggler that need to be in play. That's probably why some people feel like it doesn't follow from the rule about Reactions.

The reason is that the trigger on Sheepdog has been true during the entire when-gain window, even though it enters your hand during the window. It's just "when you gain a card". But on Livery, it's "this turn, when you gain a card". We know that "this turn" means "starting from now and for the rest of this turn". It hadn't started yet when the window opened. The same goes for Goons that enters play during the when-buy window ("while this is in play").

Donald even initially ruled that Livery doesn't work. Of course, that would also have meant that Hireling played at start of turn shouldn't work, and the Goons/Haggler/etc. scenarios shouldn't work, and several others. Then he reversed that ruling.

Whether you think that Livery etc. follow naturally from the Reaction rule depends on how you view the rule. You probably view it as, "things keep triggering during the window". I used to too. The other way to think of it is, "things that triggered can keep being resolved during the window". It's clear that some people see it like that intuitively. After realizing this difference, I came to think that this second view is less of a leap in logic. But in any case, it required a ruling.

Exactly, the whole question here isn't about whether you can react to things that happened in the past even if the option to react didn't existing when the thing happened.

It's about what "this turn" means. A lot of people interpret that to mean "from now until the end of turn". But the current ruling requires it to be interpreted more as "from the beginning of your current timing window until the end of turn". Or perhaps even "from the beginning of this turn until the end of this turn". The later version probably works exactly the same as long as you also understand that things that happened before the current timing window are too late to respond to or get a benefit from.