Print

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

[Donald X.]

* With your +$1 token on Smithy, you draw 3 cards and get +$1 from playing Smithy. Then playing Smithy does that. Playing Smithy means you follow both Smithy's instructions and the token's instructions.

Speaking colloquially, not rules-technically, of course playing Smithy with the Adventures token can be communicated via "playing Smithy got you +3 Cards and +$1."

Speaking rules-technically, no, not so, sorry. Similarly with Champion out, playing Smithy gets you +3 Cards and +1 Action in a non-technical sense, but technically Champion gave you +1 Action, Smithy did not. And that's where things stand!

Harbor Village does not check "did Smithy in a vague colloquial sense give you +$1." It checks the technical sense. Smithy with the +$1 token did not give you +$1 in the technical sense.

So clearly, just saying "from playing Smithy" is not precise enough. Harbor Village must mean "if you got +$ from following Smithy's instructions" - in order to exclude other abilities that trigger when you played Smithy. What else could it mean?

For sure Harbor Village may not have the best phrasing to communicate what it does (and, I wouldn't care how these rulings fell for a fixed phrasing).

Again the line from the rulebook about Ways. The Ways cause it to be that Smithy produced $2 via Way of the Sheep. Harbor Village does not (colloquially and anthropomorphizing) expect to see such a thing, but Ways generate this situation.

I feel like the key difference for us here is that I see the rulebook text for Ways as meaning what I keep saying it means, and you feel like it does not mean that.

[Jeebus]

Speaking rules-technically, no, not so, sorry. Similarly with Champion out, playing Smithy gets you +3 Cards and +1 Action in a non-technical sense, but technically Champion gave you +1 Action, Smithy did not. And that's where things stand!

I know, that's what I concluded further down in my post, saying that we needed to be more precise. For the token it would be: With your +$1 token on Smithy, when playing Smithy, you get +$ from following the token's instructions. For Champion it would be the same.
That's exactly why I arrived at the question in my last paragraph.

[Jack Rudd]

Oooh, I've just thought of another fun Moat v Ways effect. You play an Attack, I Moat it, you then decide to use Way of the Mouse; the Mouse card is Duchess. Do I get to do the deck-inspection thing?

[AJD]

Oooh, I've just thought of another fun Moat v Ways effect. You play an Attack, I Moat it, you then decide to use Way of the Mouse; the Mouse card is Duchess. Do I get to do the deck-inspection thing?

I think yes, for the same as the chained-Cultist reasoning where Moating the first Cultist doesn't protect you against the second Cultist. If you play an Attack as Way of the Mouse in this scenario, Duchess is in a position comparable to that of the second Cultist: a separate card that the first Attack causes you to play.

[GendoIkari]

Oooh, I've just thought of another fun Moat v Ways effect. You play an Attack, I Moat it, you then decide to use Way of the Mouse; the Mouse card is Duchess. Do I get to do the deck-inspection thing?

I think yes, for the same as the chained-Cultist reasoning where Moating the first Cultist doesn't protect you against the second Cultist. If you play an Attack as Way of the Mouse in this scenario, Duchess is in a position comparable to that of the second Cultist: a separate card that the first Attack causes you to play.

Yeah... if the Mouse literally had Duchess's text instead of telling you to play a Duchess, then I think the Moat would stop Mouse from working.

[joefarebrother]

So how I interpret all this:

When you play a card:
- Move it to the play area
- Effects that trigger on playing a card happen: adventures tokens, people revealing moat, etc.
- Then you determine how to resolve the card, which involves choosing between the following applicable options:
-- The default mode, "follow it's instructions". Reckless effects this.
-- Enchantress.
-- Highwayman. Either of these options being available prevents the default mode from being chosen.
-- A Way. This can be chameleon, which says "Follow its instructions", but isn't affected by reckless, because it's not the default mode, nor is affected by enchantress or highwayman.
- Once one of those is chosen, that determines what to actually do.
- Other effects can then look for things that happen as a direct result of that; e.g. harbour village can look for getting money, moat can look for things that would affect players who revealed it, elder can look for choices, and lantern can look for a specific string and change it for something else. Indirect effects, such as via other effects that get triggered, or by playing another card, don't get seen by these things.

[Jeebus]

So how I interpret all this:

When you play a card:
- Move it to the play area
- Effects that trigger on playing a card happen: adventures tokens, people revealing moat, etc.
- Then you determine how to resolve the card, which involves choosing between the following applicable options:
-- The default mode, "follow it's instructions". Reckless effects this.
-- Enchantress.
-- Highwayman. Either of these options being available prevents the default mode from being chosen.
-- A Way. This can be chameleon, which says "Follow its instructions", but isn't affected by reckless, because it's not the default mode, nor is affected by enchantress or highwayman.
- Once one of those is chosen, that determines what to actually do.
- Other effects can then look for things that happen as a direct result of that; e.g. harbour village can look for getting money, moat can look for things that would affect players who revealed it, elder can look for choices, and lantern can look for a specific string and change it for something else. Indirect effects, such as via other effects that get triggered, or by playing another card, don't get seen by these things.

Adventures tokens, Reactions etc. are more precisely "things that happen before the played card is resolved".
Royal Carriage and League of Shopkeepers should come before the Harbor Village step. (Moat, Elder and Lantern don't happen in this step.)
These things all "trigger on playing a card", and so do Ways, Enchantress and Highwayman. The difficulty here is defining which are "indirect effects".

[Donald X.]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

[Jeebus]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

If the Way doesn't change Smithy's instructions, I agree. But then how can we technically describe it to match your ruling?

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

To me, "follow its instructions, or do the Way" must mean "follow its instructions or follow the Way's instructions". The Way has instructions, and you follow them. (Everything the players do in Dominion is following instructions, whether in the rules or on cards.)

That makes the technical definition: "With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Way of the Sheep's instructions."
Again, if not, what is it?

[faust]

A related problem that a haven't seen come up in this thread:

If the +3 cards and +$2 (via Way of the Sheep) both come from Smithy itself somehow (and not Way of the Sheep), then is it not the case that, when playing Smithy, it offers me a choice of abilities (either +3 cards or +$2) - so when I play Elder on Smithy with Way of the Sheep in the kingdom, should I not be able to get both +3 cards and +$2?

[AJD]

Elder responds specifically to the instruction to "choose one", not to any time you make a choice. For instance, Barge certainly makes you choose one of two effects, but since it doesn't say "choose one", Elder doesn't let you do both.

[Donald X.]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

If the Way doesn't change Smithy's instructions, I agree. But then how can we technically describe it to match your ruling?

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

To me, "follow its instructions, or do the Way" must mean "follow its instructions or follow the Way's instructions". The Way has instructions, and you follow them. (Everything the players do in Dominion is following instructions, whether in the rules or on cards.)

That makes the technical definition: "With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Way of the Sheep's instructions."
Again, if not, what is it?

When you use Way of the Sheep, you are certainly following Way of the Sheep's instructions.

[faust]

Elder responds specifically to the instruction to "choose one", not to any time you make a choice. For instance, Barge certainly makes you choose one of two effects, but since it doesn't say "choose one", Elder doesn't let you do both.

I don't think that follows. The text in Elder is

When it gives you a choice of abilities (e.g. “choose one”) this turn, you may choose an extra (different) option.    Allies

"Choose one" is only an example; this is clear since it also works on Pawn and Scrap.

It doesn't work on Barge presumably since that doesn't give you a choice of ability, but only of timing.

[AJD]

What the Elder FAQ in the rulebook says is, "Elder doesn't affect all choices, just ones that say 'choose' and have a list of options." So since the choice between playing a card normally or using a Way doesn't involve anything being worded in this way, Elder doesn't apply to it. That's all I meant. The reason it doesn't work on Barge really isn't because the choice is a choice of timing, but because the list of options isn't stated with the word "choose".

[Jeebus]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

If the Way doesn't change Smithy's instructions, I agree. But then how can we technically describe it to match your ruling?

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

To me, "follow its instructions, or do the Way" must mean "follow its instructions or follow the Way's instructions". The Way has instructions, and you follow them. (Everything the players do in Dominion is following instructions, whether in the rules or on cards.)

That makes the technical definition: "With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Way of the Sheep's instructions."
Again, if not, what is it?

When you use Way of the Sheep, you are certainly following Way of the Sheep's instructions.

The thing is, that definition doesn't match your conclusion that Smithy "does what the Way does". The other definition ("with Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions") does match that ruling. I still don't see a third option; this has been my point.

[Jeebus]

I just thought of this. When having played Priest, you could certainly say non-technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 (via Priest). Harbor Village says non-technically that it checks whether you got +$ from playing Chapel, but what it means technically is that it checks if you got +$ from following Chapel's instructions. You didn't, since technically playing Chapel gives you +$2 from following Priest's instructions.

And of course, Way of the Sheep says non-technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 (via Way of the Sheep). As above, this should mean technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 from following the Way's instructions.

[GendoIkari]

The reason it doesn't work on Barge really isn't because the choice is a choice of timing, but because the list of options isn't stated with the word "choose".

Absolutely. Barge could have been worded differently:

Choose one: +3 Cards and +1 Buy; or at the start of your next turn, +3 Cards and +1 Buy.

And if it were, then Elder would allow you to choose both.

(Side note, it bugs me a bit that situations where one wording is chosen over another due to reasons of what sounds best or clearest can end up having an impact on how a card functions, even when either wording would function 100% identical when a card is played normally. We saw the same thing with Patron and "Reveal", as well as Capitalism and +. Come to think of it... we've had this since the very beginning with Chancellor avoiding saying "discard your deck. Somehow it didn't bother me back then.")

[GendoIkari]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

If the Way doesn't change Smithy's instructions, I agree. But then how can we technically describe it to match your ruling?

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

To me, "follow its instructions, or do the Way" must mean "follow its instructions or follow the Way's instructions". The Way has instructions, and you follow them. (Everything the players do in Dominion is following instructions, whether in the rules or on cards.)

That makes the technical definition: "With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Way of the Sheep's instructions."
Again, if not, what is it?

When you use Way of the Sheep, you are certainly following Way of the Sheep's instructions.

The thing is, that definition doesn't match your conclusion that Smithy "does what the Way does".

But why not? I think it's been made clear at this point that Smithy can "do" things that aren't part of its instructions. Though the only thing that exists in the game currently that a card can "do" other than its instructions is a Way's instructions.

I do think after all this conversation that "a card does X" is still colloquial talk that has no technical rules meaning or usage. Cards still don't "do" things, as you originally started off saying. But the question for Harbor Village isn't technically "did Smithy give you ", it's "did playing Smithy give you ." And playing a card gives you everything that a Way used with that card gives you, through the Way's instructions.

[GendoIkari]

I just thought of this. When having played Priest, you could certainly say non-technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 (via Priest). Harbor Village says non-technically that it checks whether you got +$ from playing Chapel, but what it means technically is that it checks if you got +$ from following Chapel's instructions. You didn't, since technically playing Chapel gives you +$2 from following Priest's instructions.

I feel like Donald X has tried to make it quite clear that the bolded text is wrong. It doesn't care if you got the from following Chapel's instructions. It cares if you got the from playing Chapel.

And of course, Way of the Sheep says non-technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 (via Way of the Sheep). As above, this should mean technically that playing Chapel gives you +$2 from following the Way's instructions.

Yes, this is correct. Playing Chapel and choosing Sheep gives you + from following the Way's instructions. And following the Way's instructions are part of what you were given from playing Chapel.

To me, the simplest technical rules wording is a new term that Harbor Village introduced: "Give". (Though it uses the past tense).

"Give": Playing a card Gives you any resources that the card's instructions tell you take, as well as any resources that a Way's instructions tell you to take if a Way is used to play the card.

[AJD]

To me, the simplest technical rules wording is a new term that Harbor Village introduced: "Give". (Though it uses the past tense).

"Give": Playing a card Gives you any resources that the card's instructions tell you take, as well as any resources that a Way's instructions tell you to take if a Way is used to play the card.

(The "as well as" here can't quite be right, since the card gives you one or the other, not both. And, you know, Steward's instructions tell you to take  +$2, and they tell you to take +2 cards, but obviously it doesn't give you both of those at the same time (outside Elder scenarios).)

[AJD]

To me, the simplest technical rules wording is a new term that Harbor Village introduced: "Give". (Though it uses the past tense).

"Give": Playing a card Gives you any resources that the card's instructions tell you take, as well as any resources that a Way's instructions tell you to take if a Way is used to play the card.

(The "as well as" here can't quite be right, since the card gives you one or the other, not both. And, you know, Steward's instructions tell you to take  +$2, and they tell you to take +2 cards, but obviously it doesn't give you both of those at the same time (outside Elder scenarios).)

(So, "resources that you get as a result of following either the card's instructions or a Way used to play the card" would be closer to what you're getting at here, I think. I don't remember whether Enchantress effects need to be included here too.)

[GendoIkari]

To me, the simplest technical rules wording is a new term that Harbor Village introduced: "Give". (Though it uses the past tense).

"Give": Playing a card Gives you any resources that the card's instructions tell you take, as well as any resources that a Way's instructions tell you to take if a Way is used to play the card.

(The "as well as" here can't quite be right, since the card gives you one or the other, not both. And, you know, Steward's instructions tell you to take  +$2, and they tell you to take +2 cards, but obviously it doesn't give you both of those at the same time (outside Elder scenarios).)

(So, "resources that you get as a result of following either the card's instructions or a Way used to play the card" would be closer to what you're getting at here, I think. I don't remember whether Enchantress effects need to be included here too.)

Yeah. And while I don't think anything cares about whether or not playing Smithy when Enchanted means that playing Smithy gave you +1 Action, the wording on Enchantress sounds to me like it would. Then there's also the question of what a "resource" even is under this definition... I suppose the whole thing could be limited to only talking about since that's the only thing we ever need to know if you were "given".

Related to all of this, we need to know what Moat protects you from. And since Moat protects you from a Chameleon Militia, but not from a Cultist's Cultist, Moat appears to protect you from the same set of things that have the potential to "give" you .

[chipperMDW]

When you use Way of the Sheep, you are certainly following Way of the Sheep's instructions.

The thing is, that definition doesn't match your conclusion that Smithy "does what the Way does". The other definition ("with Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions") does match that ruling. I still don't see a third option; this has been my point.

I've been trying to find the disconnect and I'm wondering if you're maybe missing a noun in your mental model; it doesn't have a great name, but it's this thing (bolding mine):

If we look at the natural reading of the sentence, “it” seems to be “the playing of the attack card”.

Harbor Village is referring to that play of the card; further plays don't interest it.

Reckless's extra follow-instructions is part of the play of the card.

Yes; Reckless looks for a play of a card causing its instructions to be followed.

Let's call this not-well-named thing an "Instance of playing a card." When we talk about what a card does, we're really talking about what an Instance of playing a card does. Each Instance of playing a card causes a sequence of instructions to be followed. Whatever directly happens in those instructions (i.e. not things that are triggered because of abilities set up elsewhere, so no +$1 Token or Priest) is what that Instance of playing the card "does" for the purposes of Harbor Village, Moat, etc.

When a card is played normally, the sequence of instructions followed in that Instance is the one printed on the card. When a card is instead played "using" a Way, the sequence of instructions followed in that Instance is the one printed on the Way. That doesn't change the card's instructions (no card was shapeshifted; Smithy's instructions are still +3 Cards), but it changes which instructions are followed.


I think a key point here is that it doesn't matter where instructions are printed. It matters what is telling a player to follow them. Like, in your recent example with Priest, the reason the +$2 is coming from "Priest" instead of "Chapel" is not specifically because that instruction is printed on Priest cards; it's because a prior Instance of playing Priest is what told the player to follow it. By contrast, with Way of the Sheep (or any Way), it doesn't matter that the instructions were printed on the Way; the Instance of playing Chapel really is what's telling the player to follow them.

Or, more simply: Priest's +$2 is triggered; Way of the Sheep's +$2 is not.

[Donald X.]

The thing is, that definition doesn't match your conclusion that Smithy "does what the Way does". The other definition ("with Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions") does match that ruling. I still don't see a third option; this has been my point.

I don't agree. I don't think I have another way to say it. As you noted, maybe you can find another person to chime in and think this through.

Edit: * looks up *

[Jeebus]

With Way of the Sheep, is +$2 something the Smithy tells you to do? According to Donald X.'s ruling, it is. Then what is the precise description of playing Smithy with Way of the Sheep? Is it the following?
With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Smithy's instructions.
If not, what is it?

Smithy's instructions stay "+3 Cards," so I would not describe Way of the Sheep's +$2 as something you get "from following Smithy's instructions."

If the Way doesn't change Smithy's instructions, I agree. But then how can we technically describe it to match your ruling?

+$2 is something you got from playing Smithy, specifically attributed to playing Smithy via the Way rules. It doesn't change Smithy's instructions. Ways mean you can play a card to follow its instructions, or to do the Way.

To me, "follow its instructions, or do the Way" must mean "follow its instructions or follow the Way's instructions". The Way has instructions, and you follow them. (Everything the players do in Dominion is following instructions, whether in the rules or on cards.)

That makes the technical definition: "With Way of the Sheep, when playing Smithy, you get +$2 from following Way of the Sheep's instructions."
Again, if not, what is it?

When you use Way of the Sheep, you are certainly following Way of the Sheep's instructions.

The thing is, that definition doesn't match your conclusion that Smithy "does what the Way does".

But why not? I think it's been made clear at this point that Smithy can "do" things that aren't part of its instructions. Though the only thing that exists in the game currently that a card can "do" other than its instructions is a Way's instructions.

Why not: Because that definition, as I'm sure you'll agree if you read it again, doesn't say that Smithy "does" or "gives" +$2. It says that the Way does it.

I do think after all this conversation that "a card does X" is still colloquial talk that has no technical rules meaning or usage. Cards still don't "do" things, as you originally started off saying. But the question for Harbor Village isn't technically "did Smithy give you ", it's "did playing Smithy give you ." And playing a card gives you everything that a Way used with that card gives you, through the Way's instructions.

I've brought up several times how "playing a card gives you" is also colloquial talk that has no technical rules meaning. (Directly continued in my next post)