Print

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

[Honkeyfresh]

I’m personally sad to see I’ll gotten gains go. Another copper strategy bites the dust. But I am glad to Silk Road go. And now we have 2 militia variants in one expansion awesome.

One card that mentions Copper =/= "Strategy"

in fairness this card does print coppers, but usually not very strategic to so so.

[vidicate]

After playing for a while I am here to report that Cauldron actually sucks.  By the time you are ready to gain three actions, you might as well just buy a province.  Usually buying enough 2s and 3s to activate it means your engine is a lot weaker.  Truth be told it would be a great card if it were the second action and not the third action.

It's a 5 cost woodcutter that in very limited situations can give out a curse?  Gross

even donald x says so in the explanation

Cauldron isn't tied to gaining Cauldrons, so it doesn't empty its own pile, just the Curses, and it's not even great at emptying those. But it's a Silver with a +Buy so it doesn't have to always Curse them. And it ties into the when-gain theme, being better with cards like Border Village.

The other 2 are great though.

Donald X is very unlikely to ever design an alt-Silver for less than $5, for reasons that have been thoroughly cemented while play testing such cards over the years. (He regrets making Stockpile.) Getting your +Buys from Treasures is extremely efficient, and usually worth the cost increase (or whatever other downside is attached).

Buying a bunch of 2s and 3s just to trigger the attack sounds awful. A Cauldron in an engine with a gainer/remodeler should do much better, especially once you are hitting a total payload of $8 and higher. (You know you don’t have to gain all 3 Actions after playing the Cauldron, right?) This synergy is especially nice with good terminal gainers/remodelers, since the Cauldron don’t care. And a shoutout to the Horse gaining cards.

[Jeebus]

Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance …
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list.

I think you missed several, but I'm not in front of my computer. We already went through this in another thread. The definition of your cards is the cards in your zones, has been like that for a while. Your hand, your deck, your discard pile, your play area, your set-aside area (including mats).

[vidicate]

Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance …
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list.

I think you missed several, but I'm not in front of my computer. We already went through this in another thread. The definition of your cards is the cards in your zones, has been like that for a while. Your hand, your deck, your discard pile, your play area, your set-aside area (including mats).

Thanks, Nick. I was under no illusion that that was the technical definition of what cards are yours, hence the “i.e.”
I look forward to seeing what I didn’t cover for all ways that a card can change from being !yours to yours.

[GendoIkari]

Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance …
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list.

I wish I had thought to use “acquire” instead of “get” when I wrote this thread 7 years ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13116.0

I think Trail / playing a card is the only thing to add to my list since last time I edited it.

You missed Exchange. And actually we both missed buying a card. A card you buy becomes yours before you gain it, although with the new errata removing all on-buy triggers, I don’t think this distinction would ever matter.

[grrgrrgrr]

Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance …
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list.

Your point regarding Play also isn't fully accurate. You should say "unless instructed to leave it somewhere". And actually, entering a zone you control covers everything.

[ems57fcva]

All together, the three update packs amount to 27 new cards - a full expansion, out of nowhere.

This leads me to several questions:
1) is this the "expansion" that people have been expecting to come out later this year?  (I recall your saying the you have enough material for another expansion, not that a whole new expansion was coming.)
2) Will there be a combined update pack for the three updated expansions (as you have enough material for a full box)?
3) Is this the end of the 2E updates for now?
4) Will there be any update pack(s) for the tweaked cards?

[vidicate]

Donald X announced the fall expansion in the Seaside 2E secret history. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21231.0

I usually have a section going on about outtakes. Seaside 2E though was worked on at the same time as both Allies and the fall expansion (fall expansion?). Ideas went back and forth (Sentinel at one point was going to replace Lookout).  So most of these outtakes aren't really looking to be talked about yet.

And it’s been confirmed by other Dominion “cadre” since then, with I believe a predicted October timeframe.

[ems57fcva]

Donald X announced the fall expansion in the Seaside 2E secret history. http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21231.0

I usually have a section going on about outtakes. Seaside 2E though was worked on at the same time as both Allies and the fall expansion (fall expansion?). Ideas went back and forth (Sentinel at one point was going to replace Lookout).  So most of these outtakes aren't really looking to be talked about yet.

And it’s been confirmed by other Dominion “cadre” since then, with I believe a predicted October timeframe.

Thank you for this.  At least it is something concrete to go on.  Personally, I will believe it when I see an official announcement of the expansion including its name and an official release date (or target release date).  I suspect that October is a bit optimistic given the current environment (which delayed the release of Allies for months), but this does give me confidence that the expansion will appear either late this year or early next year.

[Honkeyfresh]

After playing for a while I am here to report that Cauldron actually sucks.  By the time you are ready to gain three actions, you might as well just buy a province.  Usually buying enough 2s and 3s to activate it means your engine is a lot weaker.  Truth be told it would be a great card if it were the second action and not the third action.

It's a 5 cost woodcutter that in very limited situations can give out a curse?  Gross

even donald x says so in the explanation

Cauldron isn't tied to gaining Cauldrons, so it doesn't empty its own pile, just the Curses, and it's not even great at emptying those. But it's a Silver with a +Buy so it doesn't have to always Curse them. And it ties into the when-gain theme, being better with cards like Border Village.

The other 2 are great though.

(You know you don’t have to gain all 3 Actions after playing the Cauldron, right?)

really? Because I played it in a game with mockingbird and it wasn't handing out curses.  Or maybe I'm wrong.  That does make it a lot better then.

[vidicate]

Interesting. I’m going to use the word “acquire” to denote a card becoming your card (i.e. it is included in your deck at end of game, unless at some point it is “unacquired”).

Ways to acquire a card:
* Anytime you gain a card, in any way and for any reason.
* A card is passed or put into your hand (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Masquerade, Fortress
* Anytime you Exile a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours).
* Anytime you set aside a card (assuming it wasn’t already your card). Precedent: Inheritance …
     * (unless the original instruction later moves the card somewhere else you don’t control(?), e.g. the Supply) Precedent: none?
* Anytime you play a card (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: Trail
—hypotheticals—
* A card is put or passed into a zone you control, e.g. deck, play area, Tavern mat (assuming it wasn’t already yours). Precedent: none, other than the scenarios already covered

That was fun. Did I miss any? I thought I could come up with more hypotheticals, but alas I am tired this week.

And I’ll leave it someone else for the unacquire list.

I wish I had thought to use “acquire” instead of “get” when I wrote this thread 7 years ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13116.0

I think Trail / playing a card is the only thing to add to my list since last time I edited it.

You missed Exchange. And actually we both missed buying a card. A card you buy becomes yours before you gain it, although with the new errata removing all on-buy triggers, I don’t think this distinction would ever matter.

That thread was a funny read! Ack I missed exchange, dang; I might make some edits later.
I wasn’t including cases where a card was technically unacquired, but naturally becomes yours again by the time all effects have resolved (Possession).
The buy thing is interesting, since by definition you gain the card anyway unless instructed otherwise. Does that mean a Possessed player technically owned a bought card before the Possessor did? Also, have there been any cases where 1. You buy a card. 2. It is interrupted by some trigger, and never subsequently gained. 3. It is still acquired by end of the turn. 4. And none of the other methods we listed above occurred (which would cause it to be acquired regardless)? If not, then I’m not as concerned

Your point regarding Play also isn't fully accurate. You should say "unless instructed to leave it somewhere". And actually, entering a zone you control covers everything.

I see what you mean with your first sentence. But, I mean, you can choose to add a sentence similar to that as an addendum to any process, or you can leave it out, assume it’s implied, and save yourself some time. (says the guy who put the same assumption on almost every line) But I might edit it in, thank you.
For your second sentence, sure, that’s another definition of what we’re talking about. But just stating it is a bit circular; that doesn’t give us the fun list.

[vidicate]

(You know you don’t have to gain all 3 Actions after playing the Cauldron, right?)

really? Because I played it in a game with mockingbird and it wasn't handing out curses.  Or maybe I'm wrong.  That does make it a lot better then.

Well that’s what happens when the third Action you gained was before you even played the Cauldrons, ya goof.

[Donald X.]

All together, the three update packs amount to 27 new cards - a full expansion, out of nowhere.

This leads me to several questions:
1) is this the "expansion" that people have been expecting to come out later this year?  (I recall your saying the you have enough material for another expansion, not that a whole new expansion was coming.)
2) Will there be a combined update pack for the three updated expansions (as you have enough material for a full box)?
3) Is this the end of the 2E updates for now?
4) Will there be any update pack(s) for the tweaked cards?

There is a new expansion coming, of all new stuff, unrelated to the 2E's; we currently are trying to have it out in October, but in this day and age it's really hard to get what you want there.

There are no plans currently for a combined update pack box. I do not see a lot of merit in this.

There are no further announced 2E's; that's all I can ever say there.

There are no plans currently to do any update packs for errata. It sounds like a really awful product to me.

[ems57fcva]

All together, the three update packs amount to 27 new cards - a full expansion, out of nowhere.

This leads me to several questions:
1) is this the "expansion" that people have been expecting to come out later this year?  (I recall your saying the you have enough material for another expansion, not that a whole new expansion was coming.)
2) Will there be a combined update pack for the three updated expansions (as you have enough material for a full box)?
3) Is this the end of the 2E updates for now?
4) Will there be any update pack(s) for the tweaked cards?

There is a new expansion coming, of all new stuff, unrelated to the 2E's; we currently are trying to have it out in October, but in this day and age it's really hard to get what you want there.

Thank you much for making this official.  I look forward to learning more about this new expansion.

Good luck with the October target date.  I see it as a good sign the you are still looking to get it out then. 

[Honkeyfresh]

(You know you don’t have to gain all 3 Actions after playing the Cauldron, right?)

really? Because I played it in a game with mockingbird and it wasn't handing out curses.  Or maybe I'm wrong.  That does make it a lot better then.

Well that’s what happens when the third Action you gained was before you even played the Cauldrons, ya goof.

ahhh that makes sense.  gotta add mockingbird/cauldron to the antisynergy list 

[chipperMDW]

The buy thing is interesting, since by definition you gain the card anyway unless instructed otherwise. Does that mean a Possessed player technically owned a bought card before the Possessor did? Also, have there been any cases where 1. You buy a card. 2. It is interrupted by some trigger, and never subsequently gained. 3. It is still acquired by end of the turn. 4. And none of the other methods we listed above occurred (which would cause it to be acquired regardless)? If not, then I’m not as concerned

I think the reason the buy thing came about in the first place was with the original wording on Inheritance that transformed "your" Estates to have abilities. People expected the when-buy and when-gain abilities from the Inherited card to trigger when you bought an Estate, so the Estates needed to be "yours" at that point so they could have those abilities. That doesn't appear to matter anymore, so "acquiring on buying" may no longer be a thing (or need to be).

I'm not sure if this is an answer to your specific question, but I guess, with old Trader you could buy a card, have it become yours, then trash it before gaining decline to gain it. Again, not anymore with current Trader (but maybe some other how).

EDIT: Brain forgot how Trader worked.

[Jeebus]

Buying a card making it yours was indeed only defined for original Inheritance, and I see no reason it would be valid anymore. It didn't make much sense in the first place. Original Trader canceled the gain before you gained the card, so it was never yours. Possession works exactly the same way.

If I'm not mistaken, luckily no current cards care about card ownership, except at the end of the game of course.

[chipperMDW]

Original Trader canceled the gain before you gained the card, so it was never yours. Possession works exactly the same way.

Well, if you bought an Inherited Estate, it did briefly become yours long enough to trigger the when-buy. If you then cancelled the gain with Trader, that would also have needed to make the Estate not yours or else it'd be sitting in the Supply belonging to you for an arbitrary period of time.

[Shvegait]

If I'm not mistaken, luckily no current cards care about card ownership, except at the end of the game of course.

Market Square cares about card ownership. That said, I don't think there are any ways to trash cards that are in a state of ambiguous ownership.

[Jeebus]

Original Trader canceled the gain before you gained the card, so it was never yours. Possession works exactly the same way.

Well, if you bought an Inherited Estate, it did briefly become yours long enough to trigger the when-buy. If you then cancelled the gain with Trader, that would also have needed to make the Estate not yours or else it'd be sitting in the Supply belonging to you for an arbitrary period of time.

Right, with the rule from original Inheritance that bought cards are yours. But not without that rule.

[vidicate]

If I'm not mistaken, luckily no current cards care about card ownership, except at the end of the game of course.

Market Square cares about card ownership. That said, I don't think there are any ways to trash cards that are in a state of ambiguous ownership.

I wonder why Market Square didn’t just say “when you trash a card”? Maybe Lurker, Gladiator, and/or Salt the Earth were in the design pool at the time. Even so, it wouldn’t be too crazy; you would still have to have the MS in your hand, and only one gold gain per reaction.

[Donald X.]

If I'm not mistaken, luckily no current cards care about card ownership, except at the end of the game of course.

Market Square cares about card ownership. That said, I don't think there are any ways to trash cards that are in a state of ambiguous ownership.

I wonder why Market Square didn’t just say “when you trash a card”? Maybe Lurker, Gladiator, and/or Salt the Earth were in the design pool at the time. Even so, it wouldn’t be too crazy; you would still have to have the MS in your hand, and only one gold gain per reaction.

Market Square needed to be clear with e.g. Thief, and otherwise, the exact wordings weren't so polished.

[Jeebus]

I wonder why Berserker isn't a Reaction card; it seems to meet all the requirements.

No "when you gain this" cards are Reactions... Trail is specifically because of the Discard part.

I see now that the weird thing is that Faithful Hound, Tunnel, Village Green, Weaver and Trail are Reactions. "When you gain this" and "when you trash this" do not make a card a Reaction, so why does "when you discard this"? It would make more sense if Reactions only triggered when other cards did something, which is the case for most of them.

[joefarebrother]

"When you discard this" is a reaction so that it works when the card could be otherwise hidden (if something else was discarded on top of it) as well as to remind players about it (same as with patron)

[Jeebus]

"When you discard this" is a reaction so that it works when the card could be otherwise hidden (if something else was discarded on top of it) as well as to remind players about it (same as with patron)

How does it help that it's blue if it's hidden?

Patron is presumably blue because it's easy to miss the below-the-line stuff when you're just revealing it. "When-gain" is not so easy to miss, because you would usually look more closely at a card you're gaining. But discarding and trashing seem pretty similar; both could involve several cards at once.