Print

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

[Donald X.]

Squire is the complement to Steward that you always knew I'd make. Okay maybe you didn't figure that one out. You get a choice of three things that Steward doesn't get you, plus $1 in the bargain. It's a pretty nifty $2, just for that. And if he gets trashed, then you get an attack, any attack on the table. You can Remodel a Squire into a Remodel and a Familiar.

A major theme of Dark Ages is upgrading, whatever that means. Actually I think I can explain it: it's, turning cards into other cards. Some cards turn other cards into other other cards, like Graverobber does, but some cards turn themselves into other cards, and Squire is one of those.

Hermit is another. He's normally content to just trash certain cards and gain some Silvers or something. But if you don't make enough trips into town, he loses it. He goes mad. And then he blows up one day in a fit of card-drawing. Which is my way of saying, well it's all there on the card. That stuff.

Hermit turns into Madman, a card that isn't in the supply. You can't buy a Madman; if you want one, you have to get a Hermit and then not buy something. And then you only get it once! Somehow it's worth the trouble.

Turning a card into a specific new non-kingdom card requires a pile of ten of those cards. Yes do you really need ten, I know. But you do. And well how much of the set wanted to go to that stuff, rather than say new kingdom cards? So in the end I just did two of those. Now you know one of them.

[Kuildeous]

So, does a Hermit count for three-piling? I'm guessing not...similar to prizes.

Edit: Actually, answered my own question. It's not in the supply, therefore no.

[GendoIkari]

2 words: Squire, Goons.

[blackb]

Hermit does count. Madman don't.

[clb]

Can you imagine being able to play 2 or 3 madmen in a single turn? It seems on par with native village for mega-turn possibility; it takes a little bit of setup, but when it goes off, game over.

[sitnaltax]

Squire = Jack of Several Trades

(And unique for, unless I'm totally mind blanking, being the first card that natively offers +2 Buys.)

[Kuildeous]

"Someday, boy, you will no longer be a lowly squire. It all depends on what you aspire to be."

"Could I be a part of the militia?"

"Indeed you could, boy. Sir Johan went from a lowly squire to heading the town's militia."

"Wow. I can't wait."

*insert training montage, say, set to the music of Survivor*

"It is time, boy. Step forward and receive your new title due to all your hard work."

"I'm ready."

"I hereby name you Sir Bluto the Bureaucrat."

"&%#@!"

[Forge!!!]

Oh god, I can't wait to explain hermits to my dad. That'll only take half an hour. Ignoring ease of explanation to confused older people, these look really cool. I'm curious to see what time of the game hermits/madmen will be good during. Trashing/not buying anything really forces hermit to be an early card, but the whole finding cards in the discard pile and getting +1 card for every card in your hand are really later game things.

[philosophyguy]

Madman is an awesome effect, obviously—but it takes a lot of shuffling to make it happen. One shuffle to purchase the Hermit, one shuffle in which you play the Hermit and don't buy anything, and then one shuffle in which you draw and play the Madman. It's close to the effect Potion has: when you play a Potion, you generally have to either buy the Potion-cost card and forgo the rest of your money (similar to playing the Hermit and not buying anything) or use the rest of your cash and forgo the Potion cost card.

[GendoIkari]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

*Edit* Graverobber, duh!

[cactus]

Putting aside what the cards do for one minute.... I have to say the art on the cards in dominion has come a long long way.... these look absolutely fantastic!

Now if only we could get a couple of the cards (that shall not be named) from the earlier sets refitting the whole game would look amazing. Oh look, that thread again.

[Kuildeous]

Aha, clever wording to ensure that the Madman's effect does not benefit from Throne Room/King's Court. Nice. Well, you still get the extra actions.

Not sure what to think about a "village" that's actually a person.

I know Dominion gets dinged on theme, but the Hermit/Madman relationship is pretty awesome.

[carstimon]

I'm confused about some of the wording:
1.  Why do you return the madman to the supply instead of the simpler "trash it".  There are 10 hermits. To get a madman you trash a hermit. 
2.  Why does the madman say "if you do" for returning it to the madman pile?  It seems like you'll always be able to return it to the madman pile.

[philosophyguy]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

Can't Graverobber bring back Hermits?

[Davio]

So Madman is like a mini tactician?

@GendoIkara, isn't Graverobber able to salvage this from the trash and reuse it?
@carstimon: The "if you do" clause is similar to Mining Village. If you TR or KC it, you get the actions twice, but the cards only once.

[Tmwinand]

You could use a madman more than ten times if it keeps getting returned to the supply instead of trash.  Retread the cards and explanation.

[Kuildeous]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

Thanks to Graverobber (and probably other cards), you can now have more than 10 Hermits.

[DukeJozza]

Am I right in thinking having a Madman within your Tactician hand will net you +9 cards?!

[philosophyguy]

2.  Why does the madman say "if you do" for returning it to the madman pile?  It seems like you'll always be able to return it to the madman pile.

Throne Room-Madman. You get +4 Actions but only double your handsize once.

[GendoIkari]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

Thanks to Graverobber (and probably other cards), you can now have more than 10 Hermits.

Oh duh! Thanks.

[Mister Alex]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

Can't Graverobber bring back Hermits?

Looks that way.  But returning Madmen to the pile (instead of trashing it) would mean you couldn't then Graverobber a Madman.

[Davio]

2 words: Squire, Goons.

Yes, but Squire can't trash itself so it seems the lowly Trade Route and Develop may see more play.
And then you need to draw them together to get lucky.

Actually, it seems like Squire - Hermit - Madman? is a combo in itself. 

[Grujah]

Madman is mega-turn King, but hard to set up.

Squire is great, it is a filler card that gives you +Actions for actionless boards or +2 buys for buyless boards. Great, verstile stuff.

But, main thing is, this hand:
Remake, Silver, Squire, Squire, Watchtower.
Remake Squires into 2 Villages, Gaining two Goons, buying a Squire.
Topdeck it all.
Double goons with 5 buys. (+2 cards).

Actually, reading it again, it seems Squire is the guy you always want, but always for differnt things, depending on what board has/doesn't have (actions, buys, attacks, trashing, junkers).

Both seems a little under-priced, but who knows.

[Varsinor]

I'm pretty sure the Squire will hit the top 5 of the $2 cards, looks really versatile and strong!

[Gansura]

Hermit begets hermit begets madman = Buy Hermit, shuffle, play Hermit, gain Hermit, don't buy anything, trash Hermit, gain Madman.

So it takes a couple of shuffles to get the benefit, but once you've got one Hermit, you have a handful.

[iMystic]

Wow, I like Squire a lot for its flexibility.
Squire + Steward itself is a nice combo, so much flexibility.
Steward can trash squire to gain attack card.
Squire can provide +action then use Steward to draw (serves as engine link).

Madman,, wow...
a one shot Tactician with hard setup. Interesting,,

[Grujah]

Hermit begets hermit begets madman = Buy Hermit, shuffle, play Hermit, gain Hermit, don't buy anything, trash Hermit, gain Madman.

So it takes a couple of shuffles to get the benefit, but once you've got one Hermit, you have a handful.

Which is kinda ironic, they are usually alone. 

[mrdirt73]

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

Thanks to Graverobber (and probably other cards), you can now have more than 10 Hermits.

And since there may be more cards like Graverobber that lets you take from the trash, Madman won't be there unless trashed in a different way.

[philosophyguy]

I'm assuming that Squire can't turn into Followers, because that would be just…wow. Squire/Chapel would suddenly be a top opening with your 2/2 split.

[Grujah]

I'm assuming that Squire can't turn into Followers, because that would be just…wow. Squire/Chapel would suddenly be a top opening with your 2/2 split.

I think only supply attacks count. Same as you can swindle copper into prizes.

[Varsinor]

But returning Madmen to the pile (instead of trashing it) would mean you couldn't then Graverobber a Madman.

You couldn't do that anyway because it doesn't cost from 3 to 6. But there may be other new cards that could have taken the Madman from the trash if it went there.

[philosophyguy]

Madman,, wow...
a one shot Tactician with hard setup. Interesting,,

Although, I think Madman will actually combo really well with Tactician. Besides setting off insane hand drawing, Village-Hermit-Tactician is the perfect setup for Madman because you usually forgo your buy on the turn you play Tactician anyway.

[iMystic]

a strategy to save up madmen and not using them, then use it for one super big turn might be good. with lots of +buy ofc.

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

worth only if there are much money in deck, xD

[dor]

I bet Squire is the main reason Graverobber can't get actions costing less than $3 from the trash.

[Wolphmaniac]

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

I think it's actually 5 (+4) -> 9 (+8) -> 17 (+16) -> 34 (+33) -> 67
In other words, if you play 4 Madmen in a row from a 5-card hand, you would have a 67-card hand...if your deck is actually that big!  Even just Madman > Madman gets you a 17-card hand and 3 actions.

[Davio]

I'm assuming that Squire can't turn into Followers, because that would be just…wow. Squire/Chapel would suddenly be a top opening with your 2/2 split.

It's likely going to be anyway.

I mean, T1 Squire, T2 Chapel, T3 Goons = woopdidoo!

[dor]

a strategy to save up madmen and not using them, then use it for one super big turn might be good. with lots of +buy ofc.

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

worth only if there are much money in deck, xD

Now if only we had a cheap card that can give both money and buys... 

[mrdirt73]

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

I think it's actually 5 (+4) -> 9 (+8) -> 17 (+16) -> 34 (+33) -> 67
In other words, if you play 4 Madmen in a row from a 5-card hand, you would have a 67-card hand...if your deck is actually that big!  Even just Madman > Madman gets you a 17-card hand and 3 actions.

I think the original math is correct.  Play madman, you now have 4 cards + 4 = 8.  Play madman you have 7 + 7 for 14 etc..

[Tdog]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

[mrdirt73]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

Or a big trap.

[Tdog]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

Or a big trap.

How? At worst it's a non-drawing village and of you activate it its power becomes awesome.

[werothegreat]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Scheme says: "If you discard it from play, put it on your deck."

Hermit says: "When you discard this from play..."

Scheme does not say "if you WOULD discard", so I'm assuming this means you have to discard it from play, then put it on your deck, which means it would trigger Hermit in a turn without a Buy, and Scheme can do nothing to save it.

Not that I'd really want to save the Hermit from madness; this is purely academical.

[Schneau]

What is this I don't even.

+2 Buys? Trashing from discard? Madmen? Gaining from trash? Negative money?

All the rules are broken!

[iMystic]

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

I think it's actually 5 (+4) -> 9 (+8) -> 17 (+16) -> 34 (+33) -> 67
In other words, if you play 4 Madmen in a row from a 5-card hand, you would have a 67-card hand...if your deck is actually that big!  Even just Madman > Madman gets you a 17-card hand and 3 actions.

I think the original math is correct.  Play madman, you now have 4 cards + 4 = 8.  Play madman you have 7 + 7 for 14 etc..

Yep right, thanks. Starting 5 = including Madman.
(5 - 1) * 2 = 8
(8 - 1) * 2 = 14
(14 - 1) * 2 = 26

[GendoIkari]

What is this I don't even.

+2 Buys? Trashing from discard? Madmen? Gaining from trash? Negative money?

All the rules are broken!

You forgot $1 cost card!

[Schneau]

What is this I don't even.

+2 Buys? Trashing from discard? Madmen? Gaining from trash? Negative money?

All the rules are broken!

You forgot $1 cost card!

This will drive me to madness! (maybe I should become a Hermit?)

[iMystic]

a strategy to save up madmen and not using them, then use it for one super big turn might be good. with lots of +buy ofc.

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

worth only if there are much money in deck, xD

Now if only we had a cheap card that can give both money and buys... 

Baron, Pawn, Horse Traders, Bridge...
Hey, Madman + Bridges stack would be awesome.

[Thisisnotasmile]

So the answer to the "how do you get enough Cultists quickly enough to chain them?" question has been answered. Trash Squires.

[Grujah]

Waaaait.

Does Warehouse/Cellar + Hermit work? Like, to turn them into Madmen?

[Julle]

a strategy to save up madmen and not using them, then use it for one super big turn might be good. with lots of +buy ofc.

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

worth only if there are much money in deck, xD

Now if only we had a cheap card that can give both money and buys... 

Herbalist 

[werothegreat]

Waaaait.

Does Warehouse/Cellar + Hermit work? Like, to turn them into Madmen?

No.  "When you discard this FROM PLAY"

[Kahryl]

Too much fun. I'm liking every reveal more and more. Which makes me angrier and angrier these won't be on Iso!!

[Grujah]

Waaaait.

Does Warehouse/Cellar + Hermit work? Like, to turn them into Madmen?

No.  "When you discard this FROM PLAY"

Right. Phew.

[Robz888]

These cards are crazy! Squire looks really good. I am quite surprised it's balanced at $2. (Of course, that's what we said about Crossroads at first.)

[werothegreat]

Does anyone else get the image from Hermit of some dirty old man poking through your trash, grunting?  Sort of like Yoda going through Luke's camp when they first meet on Dagobah.  Finding the flashlight turns him into a Madman.

[joel88s]

 

Unless I'm missing something... is there any practical difference between trashing a Madman and returning it to the pile? Because there are only 10 Hermits, you can only ever get 10 Madmen...

*Edit* Graverobber, duh!

Looks like this is the big shift we have to get our heads around: This isn't your grandmother's Trash pile. It's alive!

[Donald X.]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Scheme says: "If you discard it from play, put it on your deck."

Hermit says: "When you discard this from play..."

Scheme does not say "if you WOULD discard", so I'm assuming this means you have to discard it from play, then put it on your deck, which means it would trigger Hermit in a turn without a Buy, and Scheme can do nothing to save it.

Not that I'd really want to save the Hermit from madness; this is purely academical.

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

[mrdirt73]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

Or a big trap.

How? At worst it's a non-drawing village and of you activate it its power becomes awesome.

Which you can only get by not buying something on a turn. (just realized that you could have more than one hermit in hand when not buying and thus get more than one madman and only miss one buy)  Even so, they're only used once then you have to return to the supply. 

ETA:  All I'm saying is that it's a potential trap.  I think it's too early to tell.  At least for those of us not named Donald.

[Robz888]

And now for the third installment of But How Do They Combo With Scout?

Squire/Scout is just obvious combo territory. Scout let's you know what's on top of your deck. Squire benefits from this knowledge, because then you know to choose Actions or Buys. And you know what your next hand looks like. Great!

With Hermit, here's the scenario: Oh no, Silvers are Embargoed! Well, you just buy Scout, and then you buy Hermit, and then you use Hermit to dig Scout out of the discard pile and trash it, and you can gain the Silver. Then, repeat for more Silvers.

Madman doubles your handsize. With so many cards in hand, you'll probably have an Estate or something left in your draw pile. And Scout is there to save the day. He makes sure you get that Estate right now.

[GendoIkari]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Scheme says: "If you discard it from play, put it on your deck."

Hermit says: "When you discard this from play..."

Scheme does not say "if you WOULD discard", so I'm assuming this means you have to discard it from play, then put it on your deck, which means it would trigger Hermit in a turn without a Buy, and Scheme can do nothing to save it.

Not that I'd really want to save the Hermit from madness; this is purely academical.

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

Holy crap... Scheme + Hermit sounds like an insane powerhouse! You can gain a Madman several turns in a row with just 1 Hermit; provided enough Schemes.

[werothegreat]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Scheme says: "If you discard it from play, put it on your deck."

Hermit says: "When you discard this from play..."

Scheme does not say "if you WOULD discard", so I'm assuming this means you have to discard it from play, then put it on your deck, which means it would trigger Hermit in a turn without a Buy, and Scheme can do nothing to save it.

Not that I'd really want to save the Hermit from madness; this is purely academical.

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

In other words, instead of causing insanity, Scheme just causes Multiple-Personality disorder.

[ashersky]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

[Wolphmaniac]

for each Madman played in one turn,
handsize: 5 -> 8 -> 14 -> 26

I think it's actually 5 (+4) -> 9 (+8) -> 17 (+16) -> 34 (+33) -> 67
In other words, if you play 4 Madmen in a row from a 5-card hand, you would have a 67-card hand...if your deck is actually that big!  Even just Madman > Madman gets you a 17-card hand and 3 actions.

I think the original math is correct.  Play madman, you now have 4 cards + 4 = 8.  Play madman you have 7 + 7 for 14 etc..

Yep right, thanks. Starting 5 = including Madman.
(5 - 1) * 2 = 8
(8 - 1) * 2 = 14
(14 - 1) * 2 = 26

You are right, I am wrong.  You get +1 respect!  OK, so 2 Madmen from a 5-card hand = a 14 card hand and 3 actions.  If the rest of your deck is Bridges and a couple of Villages, we have a new Mega Turn trigger that's worth trying.

[ehunt]

squire + chapel + feodum seems quite strong. feodum is interesting in being the first cheap alternate vp card not to conflict with early trashing.

[LastFootnote]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

[WheresMyElephant]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

Or a big trap.

How? At worst it's a non-drawing village and of you activate it its power becomes awesome.

Which you can only get by not buying something on a turn. (just realized that you could have more than one hermit in hand when not buying and thus get more than one madman and only miss one buy)  Even so, they're only used once then you have to return to the supply. 

ETA:  All I'm saying is that it's a potential trap.  I think it's too early to tell.  At least for those of us not named Donald.

It reminds me a lot of Inn, which people know how to play. You basically waste a buy phase for a megaturn. And Hermit can ensure the availability of more Hermits.

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Watchtower isn't bad for topdecking Hermits and speeding that process along either.

[werothegreat]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Tired of University not drawing cards?  Well, just University a Cultist with a Watchtower in hand!  University turns into a mega-super-Lab-Village-thing!  Ruins?  Pssh.  Real men use Cultists for +Cards.

[WheresMyElephant]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Or 4 with Trader.

Ironworks Cultist, trash with Watchtower, draw three cards.

[jsimantov]

If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

Which is probably the reason that Madman returns itself to the Madman pile rather than trashing itself--since you can use Scheme (or Possession, right?) to protect the Hermit from being trashed, so more than 10 Madmen could be gained during the course of a game (or, of course, you can Graverobber the Hermit back after it's trashed, or probably through some other unrevealed way).

[Grujah]

And now for the third installment of But How Do They Combo With Scout?

Squire/Scout is just obvious combo territory. Scout let's you know what's on top of your deck. Squire benefits from this knowledge, because then you know to choose Actions or Buys. And you know what your next hand looks like. Great!

With Hermit, here's the scenario: Oh no, Silvers are Embargoed! Well, you just buy Scout, and then you buy Hermit, and then you use Hermit to dig Scout out of the discard pile and trash it, and you can gain the Silver. Then, repeat for more Silvers.

Madman doubles your handsize. With so many cards in hand, you'll probably have an Estate or something left in your draw pile. And Scout is there to save the day. He makes sure you get that Estate right now.

Actually, Scout - Madman do have potential. Draw things with scout, increase your draw output with Madman (more cards in hand).

[werothegreat]

And now for the third installment of But How Do They Combo With Scout?

Squire/Scout is just obvious combo territory. Scout let's you know what's on top of your deck. Squire benefits from this knowledge, because then you know to choose Actions or Buys. And you know what your next hand looks like. Great!

With Hermit, here's the scenario: Oh no, Silvers are Embargoed! Well, you just buy Scout, and then you buy Hermit, and then you use Hermit to dig Scout out of the discard pile and trash it, and you can gain the Silver. Then, repeat for more Silvers.

Madman doubles your handsize. With so many cards in hand, you'll probably have an Estate or something left in your draw pile. And Scout is there to save the day. He makes sure you get that Estate right now.

Actually, Scout - Madman do have potential. Draw things with scout, increase your draw output with Madman (more cards in hand).

This made me just realize that Madman is a Crossroads variant.

[GendoIkari]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Or 4 with Trader.

Nope, that doesn't work. If you reveal Trader, you never gain the Feodum, so you can't reveal Watchtower to trash it.

[bedlam]

Sage might help you activate your Hermit sooner...

[dor]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Or 4 with Trader.

Ironworks Cultist, trash with Watchtower, draw three cards.

Cultist costs $5

[LastFootnote]

In all this Madman craziness, I think we're ignoring how useful Hermit can be in its own right. The ability to trash cards that aren't in your hand is significant. In games with Curse-givers and/or Looters, it's a powerful deck thinner. It gains you a Silver (for Big Money) or a Village (for your engine) in the bargain. If you're so bogged down with bad cards that you know you won't buy anything this turn, you can use Hermit to gain another Hermit and turn your current one into a Madman.

[GendoIkari]

In all this Madman craziness, I think we're ignoring how useful Hermit can be in its own right. The ability to trash cards that aren't in your hand is significant. In games with Curse-givers and/or Looters, it's a powerful deck thinner. It gains you a Silver (for Big Money) or a Village (for your engine) in the bargain. If you're so bogged down with bad cards that you know you won't buy anything this turn, you can use Hermit to gain another Hermit and turn your current one into a Madman.

Ha, I just pointed out in my other thread that no one is talking about Hermit's regular action.

[Avin]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Would even make it worth having a ruined market in hand if you've also got a watchtower, and Squire is on the board, with at least 4 money to spend.

[NoMoreFun]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Oh dear

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

[bedlam]

I'm getting the feeling that with all the extra setup and piles that it would be fun to play Dark Ages by itself, without any of the other expansions, just for all the card interactions.

[jonts26]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Oh dear

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

Those benefits get worse as you increase the coin.

[Kelume]

Oh my gosh, Chapel/Squire or Remake/Squire with Possession on the board... talk about your degenerate games.

[shraeye]

In all this Madman craziness, I think we're ignoring how useful Hermit can be in its own right. The ability to trash cards that aren't in your hand is significant. In games with Curse-givers and/or Looters, it's a powerful deck thinner. It gains you a Silver (for Big Money) or a Village (for your engine) in the bargain. If you're so bogged down with bad cards that you know you won't buy anything this turn, you can use Hermit to gain another Hermit and turn your current one into a Madman.

Yeah, this is a craaazy ability for only $3.  Trash any card from your discard?? I never worry about drawing my coppers/curses with my trasher, and I never have the dilemma of whether to trash a copper because it's long-term good when I have exactly $5 in hand.

[ashersky]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Oh dear

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

I prefer:

Gaining and top decking two Familiars: $4 with 2 buys.  And so on.

[GendoIkari]

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

Discovering new and awesome combos through a huge amount of new and powerful cards: Priceless.

[Avin]

Oh my gosh, Chapel/Squire or Remake/Squire with Possession on the board... talk about your degenerate games.

Possession isn't an attack, so unless there are other attack cards available, this wouldn't be so bad.

[jonts26]

In all this Madman craziness, I think we're ignoring how useful Hermit can be in its own right. The ability to trash cards that aren't in your hand is significant. In games with Curse-givers and/or Looters, it's a powerful deck thinner. It gains you a Silver (for Big Money) or a Village (for your engine) in the bargain. If you're so bogged down with bad cards that you know you won't buy anything this turn, you can use Hermit to gain another Hermit and turn your current one into a Madman.

Yeah, this is a craaazy ability for only $3.  Trash any card from your discard?? I never worry about drawing my coppers/curses with my trasher, and I never have the dilemma of whether to trash a copper because it's long-term good when I have exactly $5 in hand.

You cant trash treasures.

[Hks]

I guess you can now draw cards in buy phase? Buy Cultist, and trash it with Watchtower? That's wierd. Not that you get any use of it, you can't play more treasure...

[bedlam]

If a squire gets Swindled, do you still get the benefit? Because technically You didn't trash it, the swindler did...

[werothegreat]

Goons, however, is an Attack.

[WanderingWinder]

If a squire gets Swindled, do you still get the benefit? Because technically You didn't trash it, the swindler did...

Technically, YOU did:

Each other player trashes the top card of his deck and gains a card with the same cost that you choose.

[shraeye]

Yeah, this is a craaazy ability for only $3.  Trash any card from your discard?? I never worry about drawing my coppers/curses with my trasher, and I never have the dilemma of whether to trash a copper because it's long-term good when I have exactly $5 in hand.

You cant trash treasures.

Good point, but still to trash Estates, Ruins, and Curses this is wonderful.  I still declare it a craaazy ability.

[werothegreat]

Yeah, this is a craaazy ability for only $3.  Trash any card from your discard?? I never worry about drawing my coppers/curses with my trasher, and I never have the dilemma of whether to trash a copper because it's long-term good when I have exactly $5 in hand.

You cant trash treasures.

Good point, but still to trash Estates, Ruins, and Curses this is wonderful.  I still declare it a craaazy ability.

Also trash Squires and Feoda.

[Kelume]

Oh my gosh, Chapel/Squire or Remake/Squire with Possession on the board... talk about your degenerate games.

Possession isn't an attack, so unless there are other attack cards available, this wouldn't be so bad.

Never before have I been so happy to be wrong.

[werothegreat]

Oh my gosh, Chapel/Squire or Remake/Squire with Possession on the board... talk about your degenerate games.

Possession isn't an attack, so unless there are other attack cards available, this wouldn't be so bad.

Never before have I been so happy to be wrong.

Let's imagine Possession is an Attack for a second.

Both players open Chapel/Squire, get a Possession.

I Possess you.  Oh.  You only have an Estate in your deck.  <.<

[bedlam]

If a squire gets Swindled, do you still get the benefit? Because technically You didn't trash it, the swindler did...

Technically, YOU did:

Each other player trashes the top card of his deck and gains a card with the same cost that you choose.

Right. Oops. Are there any times when it would be trashed, and you wouldn't get the benefit?

[jonts26]

ACtually possession does have an interesting interaction with Madman. If you get possessed and someone plays your madman, it goes back to the supply. It's not trashed so it never comes back to your hand. Which really sucks considering how strong it is/how hard it is to get in the first place.

[PSGarak]

I view Squire as a risk-free village. It's worth buying on the first turn, and it's ok to over-buy compared to how many terminal actions you have. If you don't need the actions, you take a silver instead, not a bad deal.

The big question is, when am I going to need that much +buy? The obvious answers are Gardens and Goons, but cost-reducers also come into the picture. Squire combo'd with highway, bridge, or quarry sounds like it can 3-pile a game in record time.

[jonts26]

I view Squire as a risk-free village. It's worth buying on the first turn, and it's ok to over-buy compared to how many terminal actions you have. If you don't need the actions, you take a silver instead, not a bad deal.

The big question is, when am I going to need that much +buy? The obvious answers are Gardens and Goons, but cost-reducers also come into the picture. Squire combo'd with highway, bridge, or quarry sounds like it can 3-pile a game in record time.

I think the idea is not that you need that many buys, but you'll play multiple squires and maybe only 1 for the buys. The fact that it gives 2 means you probably only need 1 squire in your engine to give buys.

[Kelume]

Let's imagine Possession is an Attack for a second.

Both players open Chapel/Squire, get a Possession.

I Possess you.  Oh.  You only have an Estate in your deck.  <.<

It would basically be terrible for whoever did not get the Possession, and terrible if both did. It's a lose-lose.

Equally likely, one person will get the squire and chapel to collide on the first shuffle, the other won't, and player A will end up with two or more possessions (by trashing their opponent's squire).

All in all, I am thankful it is not a possible target. xP

[Cuzz]

I guess you can now draw cards in buy phase? Buy Cultist, and trash it with Watchtower? That's wierd. Not that you get any use of it, you can't play more treasure...

Yeah, someone mentioned yesterday you could do the same with Farmland.

[eHalcyon]

Cross-posting from the prediction thread.  Haven't read over thoughts yet.

Squire

In general comparison to Steward, Squire is definitely a bit weaker.  This is reflected in the $2 price.  You might buy it for the extra actions or buys if the Kingdom otherwise lacks those resources.

At first glance it looks to be superior to its fellow $2 choice card, Pawn.  But one of the best uses of Pawn is non-terminal +Buy, which you cannot do with Squire.

The most interesting thing is the on-trash effect.  In Kingdoms without trashers, on-trash effects are inaccessible (barring a crazy new DA rule -- trash a card every turn unless you reveal a Shelter??).  When trashing is available, Squire is still pretty narrow.  It's not as reliable as a Feast because you have to line it up with the trasher.

Of non-DA cards, the main ones to Squire would be Familiar and Goons.  Depending on the trashers available, getting a potion is probably an easier route for Familiar.  But it works so well with Goons.  Goons wants heavy trashing too, so you can get down to a nice multi-Goons engine.  Squire can be a moneyless way to get Goons, and it will also act as a source of Actions, and even +Buy to close out your final megaturn!

You might also pick it up in games with heavy trashing where your early economy will be terrible.  You could chapel down to a thin deck and miraculously pop a few Squires into Cultists...

I think Squire will probably have quite narrow use.  But in certain Kingdoms, it will be essential.

Hermit

The trashing is slow, and the benefit is a static mini-Workshop.  However, trashing from the discard is, I think, better than trashing from the hand.  For one thing, you don't lose a card in-hand.  In the mid-to-late game, your discard pile will on average be larger than your hand as well.  Therefore, I expect Hermit will be a fantastic DA-combo-enabler, picking out cards and trashing them for on-trash benefit.

One interesting (3+ card) combo is TR/KC-Hermit-Squire-(Attack card).  TR/KC the Hermit, gain a Squire.  Use the next Hermit to trash the Squire and gain an Attack.  You can even gain another Squire to trash with the next Hermit, if you are so inclined.

Madman

Hermit is also like a delayed one-shot Tactician.  You skip your buy to get a future-Tactician in Madman.  Madman is a little weaker than Tactician, but still pretty good.  You lose out on a +Buy, but it can have a stronger effect if you have a bit of card-drawing ability.  From the wording, it looks like Madman isn't throneable.  Too bad.

[Grujah]

I guess you can now draw cards in buy phase? Buy Cultist, and trash it with Watchtower? That's wierd. Not that you get any use of it, you can't play more treasure...

Actually, you can get use of it.
You can trash stuff in buy phase with Watchtower/Farmland (Also with Noble Brigand, but doesn't matter yet) and draw:
Watchtower or Trader - which you CAN use for your second buy.
any cards (like, a gold) that you can farmland into something useful with your second buy.

[Vampyroteuthis Infernalis]

Thoughts about Hermit/Madman:

(1) Will be stronger on boards with junkers, on colony boards (for getting to a quick platinum maybe), on boards with good cards costing 3 or less (not getting a card above 3 on your turn = less painful).

(2) Good opener because of the estate trashing. Predicted pet peeve, though: drawing Hermit turn 3 with no estates.

(3) It puts you on a more reliable track for an early super turn than going for Tactician. With Tactician, you have to depend on hitting 5 money. If you're lucky, you get a five on turn 3 or 4, then sacrifice a turn playing Tactician when it comes back around, then get the super turn. Open with Hermit, get Madman for sure before the second reshuffle, play Madman. So speed-wise, they're about the same, but Hermit is more reliable. Also, gaining a 3 cost card on turn 3 or 4 seems less painful than giving up turn 5 or 6 completely with Tactician.

(4) Unlike Tactician, though, Hermit/Madman doesn't come with +Buy. BYOB.

(5) Choosing whether to delay playing Madman (keep wanting to say Mad Men) should be an interesting tactical problem.
   

[jonts26]

@eHalcyon: I think you are underselling squire a lot. If you only ever used it for actions, it's still a fairly decent engine card because hey, you usually need a village. It also gives +buy, another essential engine component. I think the attack gaining portion will be fairly narrow, but the rest of the card is really good.

EDIT: This was my 941st post, which finally gives me more than guided, who hasn't posted in 7 months.

[Varsinor]

ACtually possession does have an interesting interaction with Madman. If you get possessed and someone plays your madman, it goes back to the supply. It's not trashed so it never comes back to your hand. Which really sucks considering how strong it is/how hard it is to get in the first place.

Good catch! Yet another reason why I think it was a mistake to not label Possession an attack. There are so many ways to harm your opponent when you possess him. Now we can add Madman to the worst two so far (Ambassador and Masquerade).

EDIT: typo

[eHalcyon]

@eHalcyon: I think you are underselling squire a lot. If you only ever used it for actions, it's still a fairly decent engine card because hey, you usually need a village. It also gives +buy, another essential engine component. I think the attack gaining portion will be fairly narrow, but the rest of the card is really good.

Oh, absolutely.  But I think Steward is still better for its trashing.  Maybe I'm overvaluing trashing though.  I also expect that I would pick most other sources of +Action over Squire.  Not sure though.

Oh, and I predict that there will be a new expensive DA attack card called Knight, so as to match the Squire.

[zahlman]

You can Remodel a Squire into a Remodel and a Familiar.

You can Develop a Squire into a Fishing Village (or Watchtower?) and a Poor House and a Goons. :O

[Varsinor]

In all this Madman craziness, I think we're ignoring how useful Hermit can be in its own right. The ability to trash cards that aren't in your hand is significant. In games with Curse-givers and/or Looters, it's a powerful deck thinner. It gains you a Silver (for Big Money) or a Village (for your engine) in the bargain. If you're so bogged down with bad cards that you know you won't buy anything this turn, you can use Hermit to gain another Hermit and turn your current one into a Madman.

Quoted for truth. For instance, Hermit's trashing ability looks way better than Lookouts for the same price to me for sure (even though Lookout gives itself its own action).

[AJD]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Scheme says: "If you discard it from play, put it on your deck."

Hermit says: "When you discard this from play..."

Scheme does not say "if you WOULD discard", so I'm assuming this means you have to discard it from play, then put it on your deck, which means it would trigger Hermit in a turn without a Buy, and Scheme can do nothing to save it.

Not that I'd really want to save the Hermit from madness; this is purely academical.

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

It's a good thing the lose-track rule is in the Dark Ages rulebook—this sounds like a combo people might actually want to take advantage of, unlike most of the weird effects created by the lose-track rule that have come up occasionally.

[jonts26]

@eHalcyon: I think you are underselling squire a lot. If you only ever used it for actions, it's still a fairly decent engine card because hey, you usually need a village. It also gives +buy, another essential engine component. I think the attack gaining portion will be fairly narrow, but the rest of the card is really good.

Oh, absolutely.  But I think Steward is still better for its trashing.  Maybe I'm overvaluing trashing though.  I also expect that I would pick most other sources of +Action over Squire.  Not sure though.

Oh, and I predict that there will be a new expensive DA attack card called Knight, so as to match the Squire.

It might not be as good as steward, but I think it could also be better. Trashing is very nice for engines, and I think it's more critical when your village doesn't give +card. So squire is probably on the worse end of the villages, if it didn't give the option for +buy. But the buys coupled with how cheap it is (think hamlet) will let you overload on these a bit, which you sort of need to compensate for the lack of card draw. I don't know that it will be placed higher than hamlet, but I could easily see this card in the top 5 $2 cards. And that's without the attack gaining portion.

Also steward and squire in the same kingdom could lead to some crazy quick engines. Open steward/steward, use stewards to trash 2 and pick up a squire with the leftover money. It will also be awesome with remake for the same reason.

[Varsinor]

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but Trickster and Saboteur (as if the latter had needed that ) seem to get considerably weaker with all these cards with on-trash-abilities!

[eHalcyon]

It might not be as good as steward, but I think it could also be better. Trashing is very nice for engines, and I think it's more critical when your village doesn't give +card. So squire is probably on the worse end of the villages, if it didn't give the option for +buy. But the buys coupled with how cheap it is (think hamlet) will let you overload on these a bit, which you sort of need to compensate for the lack of card draw. I don't know that it will be placed higher than hamlet, but I could easily see this card in the top 5 $2 cards. And that's without the attack gaining portion.

Also steward and squire in the same kingdom could lead to some crazy quick engines. Open steward/steward, use stewards to trash 2 and pick up a squire with the leftover money. It will also be awesome with remake for the same reason.

Overloading might be dangerous unless you have a source of +cards.  Granted, Squire comes with its own $1, but it's not a lot.

I think it is a very strong $2 and would still be decent at $3.  Maybe it's $2 because it is almost strictly weaker than FV (not actually strictly because of +Buy and on-trash effect).

Still reading thread; I wonder if anything I said has been covered already!  I have responses to some early comments but will keep reading so as not to repeat things.

[Squeek]

With Inn you could be running a Gardens/feoda mega deck and end up drawing all of it in one mega turn.

If s is your starting hand size and n is the number of madmen you've played, your handsize is:
(s-2)*2^n + 2

For example, 5 cards + no madmen=(5-2)*2^0 +2=5
5 cards + 4 madmen = (5-2)*2^4+2=50

[DrFlux]

I really like squire. I think its silly to compare it steward, as its functions are very different.

As a village its liked a gimped fishing village, and a little worse than vanilla village: I'd rather have a card than $1 on a village. However, the extra flexibility is great: with other villages on the board I'd probably try for a mix, for access to the +buy.

I also like that the options also have some BM-applications. I wouldn't try to pick up lots, but I'd grab one with an early $2 for the silvers, and it has less of a problem of terminal collision, since you can play it as a village.

Finally, its just about all you want in a disappearing village (for JOAT, Watchtower, library). Its cheap, provides money, and a +buy all in one! That's where I look forward to playing it the most!

All in all I think its a beautifully designed card.

[lespeutere]

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but Trickster and Saboteur (as if the latter had needed that ) seem to get considerably weaker with all these cards with on-trash-abilities!

Anybody guessing correctly what 'trickster' should be? ;-) Any other language but German naming it close to 'trickser'?
It's still 'swindler' here.

[Tdog]

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but Trickster and Saboteur (as if the latter had needed that ) seem to get considerably weaker with all these cards with on-trash-abilities!

What's trickster?

[zahlman]

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

Discovering new and awesome combos through a huge amount of new and powerful cards: Priceless.

There are some things coins and potions can't buy (i.e. prizes).

For everything else, there's Watchtower(tm).

[Qvist]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

[WanderingWinder]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

35 Kingdom cards*10 + 2-upgrade-into-this cards*10 + 50 ruins = 420/500. This leaves 80 cards for shelters, victory cards (we know that will be at least 2, due to feodum), and...... that seems like a LOT of shelters.

[LastFootnote]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

As I mentioned in that thread, it begs the question of what all the extra cards will be used for. So far we know there will be:

At least 352 Kingdom cards (35 different ones, at least one of which is a Victory card)
Between 20 and 22 cards like Madman that can be gained by trashing another card
Exactly 50 Ruins cards
Exactly 35 randomizers

That leaves as many as 43 cards unaccounted for. Shelters could be any number of those cards. Perhaps there are 30 of them that you randomize, like Ruins.

[Qvist]

and...... that seems like a LOT of shelters.

That's what I'm hinting at. Either a lot of shelters or a lot of surprises still waiting...

[WanderingWinder]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

As I mentioned in that thread, it begs the question of what all the extra cards will be used for. So far we know there will be:

At least 352 Kingdom cards (35 different ones, at least one of which is a Victory card)
Between 20 and 22 cards like Madman that can be gained by trashing another card
Exactly 50 Ruins cards
Exactly 35 randomizers

That leaves as many as 63 cards unaccounted for. Shelters could be any number of those cards. Perhaps there are 50 of them that you randomize, like Ruins.

Oh right, duh, randomizers. I would not at all be surprised if they had randomizers for the different ruins, the upgrade-into-this cards, and 1 or more for shelters. I am guessing there are probably different kinds of shelters, at this point.

[Axxle]

Now I know DX is trolling us.  Gaining from trash card, $1 cost card, and now a +2 buys card?

[Cuzz]

With so many cards unaccounted for, do we have a good reason for assuming there's only 35 kingdom cards? Has Donald confirmed this?

[werothegreat]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

As I mentioned in that thread, it begs the question of what all the extra cards will be used for. So far we know there will be:

At least 352 Kingdom cards (35 different ones, at least one of which is a Victory card)
Between 20 and 22 cards like Madman that can be gained by trashing another card
Exactly 50 Ruins cards
Exactly 35 randomizers

That leaves as many as 43 cards unaccounted for. Shelters could be any number of those cards. Perhaps there are 30 of them that you randomize, like Ruins.

Donald X has confirmed there are only 35 kingdom cards.  However, he has said that he refuses to say how many differently named cards there are.  So I don't think there will be 40 different Shelters.  I think we may have some more Tournament-ish cards, or something like that.

[Beyond Awesome]

With so many cards unaccounted for, do we have a good reason for assuming there's only 35 kingdom cards? Has Donald confirmed this?

yes.

[platykurtic]

Squire: As a regular card it seems like a lackluster engine component. If you're desperate for +actions to build your engine it'll do like any village, and you can accumulate them easily at least. If you need +buy for your engine, this will also do in a pinch. The flexibility is nice though, and nothing else lets you get tons of buys quite as easily. It might also be a good opener paired with a cheap card you're rushing, which right now means fools gold or poor house.
The trashing component is much more interesting. When used as an opener, what are the chances it lets you grab that crucial first attack faster than if you just bought money? 4-cost attacks you can always buy, so this is all about 5-6 and familiar. I have no doubt someone will compute the probabilities of this colliding with your trasher on turn 3, 4 versus being able to buy them but my gut feeling is that it's a bit sketchy. Racing against potion for familiar for example, you need a collision, while they just need their potion to hit with enough money.

Hermit: A mini-jack combined with a mini-one-shot-tactician. Graverobber just got better. The ability makes it probably worth opening with on curser boards, since it's got a better chance of plucking out the curses than other trashers, and you can fill your deck with silvers or cheap engine component in the meantime. You can also choose to buy nothing and get a tacticiany turn sometime later. This is probably worse vs handsize reducers since it increases the chance of being forced to buy something like copper or let this get trashed when you don't want it to (and it makes the madman turn worse). If you let your hermit go mad (great theming by the way) on turn 3/4 you'll have the madman turn 3rd shuffle.

Madman: I think the tactician analogy sums this one up best. You probably sacrificed a turn to get this one. In most cases after playing this you'll end up with an 8 card hand and two actions, which can certainly let you grab some higher cost cards earlier. If your starting hand has been reduced to 3 it just brings you up to 4 though with an extra action, which isn't great. If you've got an engine that draws half your deck and it hits without the madman, you can now draw your whole deck.

[werothegreat]

Discard your Curse to Mountebank?  Hermit it!

[AJD]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

[engineer]

A kingdom with swindler and hermit would probably make somebody very angry.  Getting your hard-earned madman turned into a curse would be game-ending, but I guess the chance of it would still be pretty slim.

[AJD]

A kingdom with swindler and hermit would probably make somebody very angry.  Getting your hard-earned madman turned into a curse would be game-ending, but I guess the chance of it would still be pretty slim.

I've done that to someone's Trusty Steed once. It's kind of satisfying.

[dor]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...".

Ambassador is trickier because you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

[AJD]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...". Ambassador is trickier since you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause, so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

A "gain" instruction on a card without further stipulation about the source of the gain always means "from the supply", though.

[werothegreat]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...". Ambassador is trickier since you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause, so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

A "gain" instruction on a card without further stipulation about the source of the gain always means "from the supply", though.

Donald X, Donald X, Donald X.

[WanderingWinder]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...". Ambassador is trickier since you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause, so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

A "gain" instruction on a card without further stipulation about the source of the gain always means "from the supply", though.

Donald X, Donald X, Donald X.

I don't know why you think we need to summon Donald X. with every little question. AJD is very clearly correct here - you normally can't gain things from anywhere other than the supply - you need to be specifically instructed to do so.

[ehunt]

I think I'll definitely skip the potion in a familiar game with squire and a good trasher. The gamble is something like: probability of familiar on second shuffle goes down from 70% to 40%, but no potion in deck, better trashing. If squire is drawn apart from trasher it can pick up two squires.

[ehunt]

(of course we are assuming there are no other desired alchemy cards)

[GendoIkari]

I think I'll definitely skip the potion in a familiar game with squire and a good trasher. The gamble is something like: probability of familiar on second shuffle goes down from 70% to 40%, but no potion in deck, better trashing. If squire is drawn apart from trasher it can pick up two squires.

In a game with Squire and a good trasher, I'm likely to ignore Familiar all together.

[DWetzel]

Squire + Watchtower?

Any attack you want...for 2!  (As long as you have Watchtower in hand.)

Whoa, yeah. Watchtower definitely boosts some cards in Dark Ages. At minimum it opens up tons of new options (like gaining 3 Silvers instead of Feodum).

Oh dear

Gaining and top decking any attack: $2
Gaining and top decking 3 silvers: $4
Cycling through 3 cards, accelerating your deck: $5

Trashing 9 coppers and 9 curses from KC-KC-Mountebank x3: STILL priceless

[werothegreat]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...". Ambassador is trickier since you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause, so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

A "gain" instruction on a card without further stipulation about the source of the gain always means "from the supply", though.

Donald X, Donald X, Donald X.

I don't know why you think we need to summon Donald X. with every little question. AJD is very clearly correct here - you normally can't gain things from anywhere other than the supply - you need to be specifically instructed to do so.

Geez, is it impossible for you to just enjoy a joke?  Are you like that butler character from Rat Race?

[GendoIkari]

So, since Madman isn't in the supply, then even though there's a whole stack of ten of them, things like Jester and Ambassador have no effect on it. Right?

Jester might work, since it doesn't mention anything about the supply: "... gains a copy of the discarded card...". Ambassador is trickier since you can't return a Madman to the supply, but there is no "if" clause, so presumably the other players can gain it, though this is probably only relevant with Possession.

A "gain" instruction on a card without further stipulation about the source of the gain always means "from the supply", though.

Donald X, Donald X, Donald X.

I don't know why you think we need to summon Donald X. with every little question. AJD is very clearly correct here - you normally can't gain things from anywhere other than the supply - you need to be specifically instructed to do so.

Geez, is it impossible for you to just enjoy a joke?  Are you like that butler character from Rat Race?

To be fair, I read the "Donald X" post as an actual desire for Donald X to come and answer the rules question; not just a joke.

[GendoIkari]

I'm not sure where to put this, I just write it here.

Dark Ages has zero blanks.

Hurray!
Now you can start counting!

As I mentioned in that thread, it begs the question of what all the extra cards will be used for. So far we know there will be:

At least 352 Kingdom cards (35 different ones, at least one of which is a Victory card)
Between 20 and 22 cards like Madman that can be gained by trashing another card
Exactly 50 Ruins cards
Exactly 35 randomizers

That leaves as many as 63 cards unaccounted for. Shelters could be any number of those cards. Perhaps there are 50 of them that you randomize, like Ruins.

Oh right, duh, randomizers. I would not at all be surprised if they had randomizers for the different ruins, the upgrade-into-this cards, and 1 or more for shelters. I am guessing there are probably different kinds of shelters, at this point.

This was your 3000th post. Just thought I'd mention.

[chwhite]

Crossposted.

Day 3!

Squire: Even without the on-trash ability, this looks like a nifty utility card for both engines and alt-VP matchups.  It can be half a Fishing Village if it collides with your other actions, it can be a mondo +Buy source (+2 Buys!  It's finally been done!), and Silver gain for $2 is a darn good value in decks where you want to flood Silver.  Compare just the silver gain option to Explorer: it gives you $1 less this turn (don't forget it always gives you a buck), and for that meager downside it's $3 cheaper and does so many more other things.  So, as a Silver gainer for alt-VP it's a fantastic value.  As A Village it's probably not a great value, but on boards where you need it it can't be much worse than the Natives; and the +Buys are great for both alt-VP and engine.  All this, and flexibility, for $2?  Seems damn strong for pretty much anything that isn't terminal draw BM.

And that's not even beginning to consider the on-trash effect!  Yikes.  I'm going to go ahead and say the on-trash effect is probably not nearly as powerful as it seems; it's the Treasure Map problem again that you have to line up your trasher and your Squire, which is often going to be an inefficient crapshoot.  Also, you may be overpaying for Squire, and in many kingdoms there either won't be trashing or there won't be Attacks.  (In general I'm not sure I like this proliferation of effects that are dead on certain boards, starting with Tunnel).  I can see it being a really good way to slingshot up to Familiar or Goons, but even the $5 Attacks I think I'll usually want to just buy the old-fashioned way.

Hermit/Madman: I...uh...wuh...buh.  I'm really not sure there's anything intelligent I can say about these two.  I kind of expected to see a trasher that rooted through the discard, actually, so that's neat.  The no-Treasure restriction makes it look JoaT-esque, and I could see it being used in that capacity (gain Silver, pitch Estate) on boring boards.  There are also probably going to be lots of other good cheap cards to get out of Dark Ages (Poor House, Squire anyone?), so it'll have some extra flexibility in engines that way.  But another thing I'm noticing is that the trashers we've seen so far- Graverobber, Hermit- both don't work on Coppers.  With Dark Ages' theme of poverty, it might be hard to get rid of those Coppers in general, which will ding Poor House for sure (and a lot of other cards).

As for Madman, I just have no idea.  When is it worth it to pass on your buy phase to get a Madman?  Just how powerful is it?  Obviously it's powerful, but you've got to jump through a lot of hoops for a one-shot.  I have no idea what do with it at all.  (Actually, that's a lie.  Horn of Plenty decks are going to love Madman.  But beyond that I'm totally stumped.)

...

And now time to read this thread.

[jotheonah]

If theory has some free time, it might be handy to collect DXV's DA rules clarifications, from here and BGG, in his special subforum. But since we haven't seen the rulebook yet, we don't know if they'll all just be addressed in there.

[werothegreat]

If theory has some free time, it might be handy to collect DXV's DA rules clarifications, from here and BGG, in his special subforum. But since we haven't seen the rulebook yet, we don't know if they'll all just be addressed in there.

They probably will be.  We already know the Lose Track rule will be in there.

[Varsinor]

Not sure if this has already been mentioned, but Trickster and Saboteur (as if the latter had needed that ) seem to get considerably weaker with all these cards with on-trash-abilities!

Anybody guessing correctly what 'trickster' should be? ;-) Any other language but German naming it close to 'trickser'?
It's still 'swindler' here.

Doh! And I could have sworn that the English names of the cards are way more familiar to me than the German ones since playing on Isotropic. I guess the Swindler must be the exception. Maybe because I have recently seen X-Men Origins: Wolverine (in English) which features the word "Trickster" a couple of times...

[AJD]

Horn of Plenty decks are going to love Madman.

Quite possibly true, but my first reaction on reading that was 'But as a one-shot, Madman can't even be counted by Horn of Plenty!'

[chwhite]

Horn of Plenty decks are going to love Madman.

Quite possibly true, but my first reaction on reading that was 'But as a one-shot, Madman can't even be counted by Horn of Plenty!'

Yeah, HoP won't count Madman.  But you can still gain stuff from your HoPs on the turns you skip a buy to turn your Hermits into Madmen, and then you can play all your Madmen at once when you go mega-turn.

[ftl]

On second thought, I think I SERIOUSLY underrated Hermit when I made my first guess at it. A common use case is going to be: Trash an estate from your discard, gain a silver, be left with a hand of 4 cards to buy something, possibly another silver.

Sound familiar? Compare to Jack of all Trades. I mean, JoAT also has top-deck filtering, and it can draw up to 5 cards in hand in the mid-game when you're not using it to trash an estate... but JoAT is also quite the powerful BM.

Using Hermit as "trash an estate, gain a silver" is already going to make it a passable BM enabler. But it also has madman shenanigans, so mid-game (after you've trashed all your estates!) you can use his self-trashing power to get a Madman - just in time for when your deck starts getting clogged with a little bit of green, allowing you to power through the last few provinces.

Drawing Hermit-4x Copper on T3 would be pretty bad, though.

I'm not saying Hermit is going to be the new JoAT or anything. It doesn't hardcounter discard-attack BM like Jack does. But still, I suspect it will turn out to be reasonably usable in BM+X.

[jonts26]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

[werothegreat]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

Workshop has gotten a boost from Poor House, Squire, Hermit and Sage.

EDIT: Which reminds me - wouldn't it be ridiculous to Workshop a Feast?

[WanderingWinder]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

Workshop has gotten a boost from Poor House, Squire, Hermit and Sage.

EDIT: Which reminds me - wouldn't it be ridiculous to Workshop a Feast?

In fact, I believe I have done that TODAY, in a game with KC and no other +buy/gainers.

[jonts26]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

Workshop has gotten a boost from Poor House, Squire, Hermit and Sage.

EDIT: Which reminds me - wouldn't it be ridiculous to Workshop a Feast?

Hard Mode: Hermit a workshop, workshop a feast, feast a graverobber, grave rob a Gold from the trash.

[eHalcyon]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

Workshop has gotten a boost from Poor House, Squire, Hermit and Sage.

EDIT: Which reminds me - wouldn't it be ridiculous to Workshop a Feast?

Hard Mode: Hermit a workshop, workshop a feast, feast a graverobber, grave rob a Gold from the trash.

Hermit Workshop and buy nothing, gaining a Madman.

Workshop a Feast.

Feast a Graverobber.

Graverob the Hermit you trashed.

[joel88s]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

This ruling surprised me a bit and I've been puzzling over it all day (I know, get a life, really.) Of course it will be nice to see the legendary and elusive Lose Track rule at last set down in black and blue. My impression is that so far it has mostly referred to one card losing track of another (Throne Room loses Mining Village, Watchtower loses Border Village, etc.) but apparently here a card can also lose track of itself.

One aspect I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that the Hermit could lose itself for the purposes of trashing itself, but not for gaining a Madman. OK I guess the idea is you read both cards (Hermit and Scheme) simultaneously and decide which to carry out first, and if the Hermit is not around when it's time to execute it, you can still remember its instructions and follow the ones you can, fair enough.

Then I'm trying to think if there's any way between the Scheming and the Hermitting that the Hermit could be buried or end up anywhere other than the top of the deck, and if not why it would count as being Lost Track Of, since as I understand it for example you can still Watchtower a card from the top of your deck. But of course we don't know how many other as yet unimaginable on-discard effects that might intervene will emerge in the next week. And I guess Lose Track may just be one those arcane realms kind of like quantum mechanics where at a certain point you have to give up on trying to understand it intuitively, and just trust the math.

(Also yes I can see how it must be so annoying when people theorize about the rules without having all the facts, enough to make you wish you'd just shut up in the first place, but hey it's kind of inevitable people will muse and speculate when they're totally excited about something, that's just human nature, there it is what are you going to do.)

A final thought though: even if for lack of 'if you do' we eschew the semantic temptation to read 'trash this and gain a Madman' as one instruction - rather like "stop at the store on the way home and pick up some milk" where the consequentially is implied even if not explicit (though I suppose to a Dominion player one ought really to say "stop at the store on the way home; if you do, pick up some milk") - even granting that logical consistency, separating them and allowing a Madman to materialize ex nihilo does at least seem to belie the expressed thematic concept, that of cards turning into other cards.

[engineer]

How about when squire, hermit and goons are all on the table?

Open hermit/hermit.  Use the first hermit to gain a squire.  Use the second hermit to turn the gained squire into goons.  You could get a goons as early as turn 4 with decent probability.

[Wolphmaniac]

Hard Mode: Hermit a workshop, workshop a feast, feast a graverobber, grave rob a Gold from the trash.

Step-By-Step Remodel Bookends Mode:
Remodel a Copper into a Poor House, Poor House buys Duchess, Duchess (+1) buys Hermit, Hermit a Workshop, Workshop a Feast, Feast a Graverobber, Grave rob a Border Village (gaining a Remake), Remake the Border Village into an Expand, Remake the Expand into a Province, Remake the Province into a Platinum, Remodel the Platinum into a Colony.

[jotheonah]

I wonder if there'll ever be a card with the text "This card cannot be trashed"

[Dsell]

This page really confused me because I didn't think I'd posted in this thread... XD

[jotheonah]

OMG, I thought he was you too. Oy the doppelgangers!

[Dsell]

By "he" you mean "them."

[eHalcyon]

By "he" you mean "them."

By "them" you mean "they" (and by "is" he meant "are").

[Dsell]

It's pretty confusing.

Actually, I have real thoughts on these cards too! Or more specifically, I think Hermit is going to counter cursers and looters quite effectively. It's a bit slow, only trashing one curse at a time, but if it's in hand when an opponent plays a curser, that curse was essentially gained in hand because it can be trashed next turn. I think the sniper-like trashing effect will be pretty strong. Furthermore, Hermits can gain more trashers (Hermits themselves! Or something better) or just gain a bunch of silvers to minimize the damage of the curses.

[Dsell]

By "he" you mean "them."

By "them" you mean "they" (and by "is" he meant "are").

And by "is" you mean "was" (in jo's original post). Nested quotes are hard. 

Edit: And by hard I mean confusing. XD Because we are just getting everything wrong all over the place.

[ftl]

I wonder if there'll ever be a card with the text "This card cannot be trashed"

No, I really doubt it; Donald X likes unambiguous rules, and "This card cannot be trashed" is in direct contradiction with a lot of cards which may forcibly trash it. If I play swindler and flip up a card that says "This card cannot be trashed", what happens? Well, you have to read the FAQ...

However, Dark Ages COULD certainly add in an equivalent mechanic; "when you trash this card, put it in your discard pile instead of the trash pile" or something. That way the card is still technically trashed (and you get any on-trash abilities) but you keep it in your deck. Or, the card could say "when you would trash this card, put it in your discard pile instead"; that way, you don't get any on-trash abilities, but it's clear what happens when you try to trash it.

[RiemannZetaJones]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

One aspect I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that the Hermit could lose itself for the purposes of trashing itself, but not for gaining a Madman. OK I guess the idea is you read both cards (Hermit and Scheme) simultaneously and decide which to carry out first, and if the Hermit is not around when it's time to execute it, you can still remember its instructions and follow the ones you can, fair enough.

Then I'm trying to think if there's any way between the Scheming and the Hermitting that the Hermit could be buried or end up anywhere other than the top of the deck, and if not why it would count as being Lost Track Of, since as I understand it for example you can still Watchtower a card from the top of your deck. But of course we don't know how many other as yet unimaginable on-discard effects that might intervene will emerge in the next week. And I guess Lose Track may just be one those arcane realms kind of like quantum mechanics where at a certain point you have to give up on trying to understand it intuitively, and just trust the math.

I think the instructions on the card are placed in a queue and executed. The 'trash' instruction is an instruction to take a physical card from the location it is expected to be in and place it in the trash. In the example at hand, when the 'trash' command is resolved, the card has already been moved, and cannot be trashed. This is my understanding of the 'lose-track' rule: any instruction which acts on a physical card comes equipped with an expected location for that card, and cannot be carried out unless the card is in that location.

[jotheonah]

Even just sniping the starting Estates seems like a great benefit.

[ST218]

Now, I think I know the answer to this, but I just want to make sure - can a Scheme save a Hermit from Madness?

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

This ruling surprised me a bit and I've been puzzling over it all day (I know, get a life, really.) Of course it will be nice to see the legendary and elusive Lose Track rule at last set down in black and blue. My impression is that so far it has mostly referred to one card losing track of another (Throne Room loses Mining Village, Watchtower loses Border Village, etc.) but apparently here a card can also lose track of itself.

One aspect I'm having trouble wrapping my head around is that the Hermit could lose itself for the purposes of trashing itself, but not for gaining a Madman. OK I guess the idea is you read both cards (Hermit and Scheme) simultaneously and decide which to carry out first, and if the Hermit is not around when it's time to execute it, you can still remember its instructions and follow the ones you can, fair enough.

Then I'm trying to think if there's any way between the Scheming and the Hermitting that the Hermit could be buried or end up anywhere other than the top of the deck, and if not why it would count as being Lost Track Of, since as I understand it for example you can still Watchtower a card from the top of your deck. But of course we don't know how many other as yet unimaginable on-discard effects that might intervene will emerge in the next week. And I guess Lose Track may just be one those arcane realms kind of like quantum mechanics where at a certain point you have to give up on trying to understand it intuitively, and just trust the math.

(Also yes I can see how it must be so annoying when people theorize about the rules without having all the facts, enough to make you wish you'd just shut up in the first place, but hey it's kind of inevitable people will muse and speculate when they're totally excited about something, that's just human nature, there it is what are you going to do.)

A final thought though: even if for lack of 'if you do' we eschew the semantic temptation to read 'trash this and gain a Madman' as one instruction - rather like "stop at the store on the way home and pick up some milk" where the consequentially is implied even if not explicit (though I suppose to a Dominion player one ought really to say "stop at the store on the way home; if you do, pick up some milk") - even granting that logical consistency, separating them and allowing a Madman to materialize ex nihilo does at least seem to belie the expressed thematic concept, that of cards turning into other cards.

Basically, the way I see it is this: You have Scheme and Hermit out, and didn't buy anything. You enter Cleanup, and proceed to discard your inplay cards. More specifically, each card receives the event "Discard this from play". Scheme sees that and says "Hey, pick an in play card to put on top your deck, then discard me." Simultaneously, Hermit says "You didn't buy anything, and you're discarding me from play? Alright, trash me and get a Madman." Since two things are happening at the same time, you choose which one goes first (just the same as you would if multiple Treasuries and Alchemists were going on top your deck at end of turn). So, you choose Scheme first and toss something on top, and then Hermit's effect is still there. The event already happened and you follow through on it. After all, "You didn't buy anything, and you're discarding me from play? Alright, trash me and get a Madman" makes no mention of needing to actually do anything with the Hermit in order to get the Madman; just that it's another thing that happens. So, that's how Scheme/Hermit turns people who get confused by rules into Madmen.

[Donald X.]

Even though Scheme says "if" rather than "when," it's the same timing as "when" - both cards do something when Hermit is discarded from play. So you pick what order to resolve the effects. If you resolve Hermit first, Scheme will be unable to find Hermit in the trash, due to the lose track rule (which is in the Dark Ages rulebook). If you resolve Scheme first, Hermit will be unable to trash itself, but will still gain you a Madman (there's no "if you do" there).

This ruling surprised me a bit and I've been puzzling over it all day (I know, get a life, really.) Of course it will be nice to see the legendary and elusive Lose Track rule at last set down in black and blue. My impression is that so far it has mostly referred to one card losing track of another (Throne Room loses Mining Village, Watchtower loses Border Village, etc.) but apparently here a card can also lose track of itself.

"Lose track" just stops a card from being moved after another card moves it.

If Scheme moves Hermit, then Hermit no longer sees itself where it expected to, and can't move itself. This doesn't prevent anything else from happening, just moving Hermit.

Similarly if Hermit moves itself, then Scheme can no longer find Hermit to move it.

"Lose track" exists because I need to say what to do when a card isn't where it's expected to be, and the answer has to be "you lose track" because in some cases you really do lose track (I think Watchtower / Border Village / Inn is covered in these forums).

[werothegreat]

Note Hermit (paraphrase) says "Trash me.  Gain a Madman."  This is similar to Feast, which is why it can be TR/KC'd.  If it said "Trash me.  IF YOU DO, gain a Madman," then the Scheme trick wouldn't work.

[jotheonah]

Guys, do you think Hermit/Hamlet is going to be the new Mine/Mint or Treasury/Tribute? Or are we saved by the cost difference?

[engineer]

It's kind of ironic that a hermit can become a madman, but a scheming hermit doesn't go mad.  Of course, a scheming hermit produces madmen -- so while he's curiously sane, anybody who listens to him goes crazy.

[Dsell]

Guys, do you think Hermit/Hamlet is going to be the new Mine/Mint or Treasury/Tribute? Or are we saved by the cost difference?

I know it's not even that close, but every time someone writes "Madman" I see "Mandarin" and I have NO IDEA WHY.

[werothegreat]

Guys, do you think Hermit/Hamlet is going to be the new Mine/Mint or Treasury/Tribute? Or are we saved by the cost difference?

Given that soon this will no longer be on iso, we'll be going by the picture, and not be almost-homophonic names, so I doubt even Mine/Mint will continue to be a problem.  Have you any of you confused Mine with Mint on Goko?

[rinkworks]

Guys, do you think Hermit/Hamlet is going to be the new Mine/Mint or Treasury/Tribute? Or are we saved by the cost difference?

Given that soon this will no longer be on iso, we'll be going by the picture, and not be almost-homophonic names, so I doubt even Mine/Mint will continue to be a problem.  Have you any of you confused Mine with Mint on Goko?

I've confused Mint and Mint in real life games with the actual cards.

[werothegreat]

But hermit is also going to be a passable workshop variant in engines with cheap cards. Gain a village, trash an estate is huge even before you decide whether or not you want to trade it for a madman.

Workshop has gotten a boost from Poor House, Squire, Hermit and Sage.

EDIT: Which reminds me - wouldn't it be ridiculous to Workshop a Feast?

Hard Mode: Hermit a workshop, workshop a feast, feast a graverobber, grave rob a Gold from the trash.

Or... Graverob the Feast - rinse and repeat.

[shMerker]

I know it's not even that close, but every time someone writes "Madman" I see "Mandarin" and I have NO IDEA WHY.

Did you konw taht the fsirt and lsat ltetres of a wrod are the msot intmrpoat in demtierinng its inditety and in trun its mnenaig?

[eHalcyon]

Note Hermit (paraphrase) says "Trash me.  Gain a Madman."  This is similar to Feast, which is why it can be TR/KC'd.  If it said "Trash me.  IF YOU DO, gain a Madman," then the Scheme trick wouldn't work.

I do not think you are saying this, but it's worth mentioning so other readers won't be confused -- TR/KC-Hermit can't get you multiple Madmen because that part of the card says, "When you discard this from play."

[werothegreat]

I know it's not even that close, but every time someone writes "Madman" I see "Mandarin" and I have NO IDEA WHY.

Did you konw taht the fsirt and lsat ltetres of a wrod are the msot intmrpoat in demtierinng its inditety and in trun its mnenaig?

Stop that.

[shMerker]

nveer

[werothegreat]

nveer

Sotp taht.

[shMerker]

now you sapek my lgagunae.

[werothegreat]

now you sapek my lgagunae.

Ich kann nur ein bisschen Deustch sprechen.

[LastFootnote]

now you sapek my lgagunae.

Ich kann nur ein bisschen Deustch sprechen.

Halt!

[zahlman]

I've confused Mint and Mint in real life games with the actual cards.

Umm... are you sure you don't mean Mine and Mine?

[Archetype]

Umm... are you sure you don't mean Mine and Mine?

He means Mnie and Mnit

[theory]

I know it's not even that close, but every time someone writes "Madman" I see "Mandarin" and I have NO IDEA WHY.

Did you konw taht the fsirt and lsat ltetres of a wrod are the msot intmrpoat in demtierinng its inditety and in trun its mnenaig?

Untrue.  This is only true for very short words.  Try deciphering this, from Wikipedia:

"Anidroccg to crad–cniyrrag lcitsiugnis planoissefors at an uemannd utisreviny in Bsitirh Cibmuloa, and crartnoy to the duoibus cmials of the ueticnd rcraeseh, a slpmie, macinahcel ioisrevnn of ianretnl cretcarahs araepps sneiciffut to csufnoe the eadyrevy oekoolnr."

[werothegreat]

I know it's not even that close, but every time someone writes "Madman" I see "Mandarin" and I have NO IDEA WHY.

Did you konw taht the fsirt and lsat ltetres of a wrod are the msot intmrpoat in demtierinng its inditety and in trun its mnenaig?

Untrue.  This is only true for very short words.  Try deciphering this, from Wikipedia:

"Anidroccg to crad–cniyrrag lcitsiugnis planoissefors at an uemannd utisreviny in Bsitirh Cibmuloa, and crartnoy to the duoibus cmials of the ueticnd rcraeseh, a slpmie, macinahcel ioisrevnn of ianretnl cretcarahs araepps sneiciffut to csufnoe the eadyrevy oekoolnr."

According to card-carrying linguistics professionals at an unnamed university in British Columbia, and contrary to the dubious claims of the uncited research, a simple, mechanical inversion of internal characters appears sufficient to confuse the everyday onlooker.

Was a challenge, but I did it without looking at anything else. 

[Schneau]

Guys, do you think Hermit/Hamlet is going to be the new Mine/Mint or Treasury/Tribute? Or are we saved by the cost difference?

Given that soon this will no longer be on iso, we'll be going by the picture, and not be almost-homophonic names, so I doubt even Mine/Mint will continue to be a problem.  Have you any of you confused Mine with Mint on Goko?

I've confused Mint and Mint in real life games with the actual cards.

I have multiple times confused Scrying Pool with Apothecary in real life games. Not because their names are similar, but because their pictures and effects are somewhat similar. Now guess who felt silly opening Potion / Chapel, trashing a bunch of Coppers on turn 3 to find out that the only potion card was Apothecary.

EDIT: punctuation.

[shMerker]

I neevr siad taht tehy wree olny intromapt lteetrs for chensomperion.

Anyway I'm just saying it's not that surprising that ManDariN and MaDmaN are easy words to confuse in the context of this forum.

[dondon151]

I like Madman's art, but I was hoping for something more simplistic, e.g.,



(Come on, please don't tell me I'm the only one who thought of that upon seeing Madman.)

[PSGarak]

Hermit is a card that will be much more powerful in the context of Dark Ages than in every-card Dominion. The reason being, targeted trashing. Trashing without decreasing your hand size is cool, and will be a decent use of the card outside of Dark Ages (I've decided "low-impact trashing" is a thing). But, when you're trying to hunt down and kill that one On-Trash card in your deck, Hermit can see over half your deck on average. This gives much better odds of being able to hit your target than, say, Remodel which can only target one of the other four cards in your hand.

In short, Hermit is not a actually a trasher. It is a guided missile for On-Trash abilities. This and Madman should be considered its primary purpose in life.

(This seems kinda obvious in retrospect, but I didn't notice anyone else explicitly mention it. Apologies if you're invisible.)

[werothegreat]

Hermit will always be the old man digging through my trash. 

http://harkavagrant.com/index.php?id=181

[eHalcyon]

Hermit is a card that will be much more powerful in the context of Dark Ages than in every-card Dominion. The reason being, targeted trashing. Trashing without decreasing your hand size is cool, and will be a decent use of the card outside of Dark Ages (I've decided "low-impact trashing" is a thing). But, when you're trying to hunt down and kill that one On-Trash card in your deck, Hermit can see over half your deck on average. This gives much better odds of being able to hit your target than, say, Remodel which can only target one of the other four cards in your hand.

In short, Hermit is not a actually a trasher. It is a guided missile for On-Trash abilities. This and Madman should be considered its primary purpose in life.

(This seems kinda obvious in retrospect, but I didn't notice anyone else explicitly mention it. Apologies if you're invisible.)

I kind of mention it in my first post.  I said it looked like a spectacular combo-enabler for the set, picking out cards for on-trash benefit.

[clb]

Madman- strongest card in the game.

Or a big trap.

How? At worst it's a non-drawing village and of you activate it its power becomes awesome.

Which you can only get by not buying something on a turn. (just realized that you could have more than one hermit in hand when not buying and thus get more than one madman and only miss one buy)  Even so, they're only used once then you have to return to the supply. 

ETA:  All I'm saying is that it's a potential trap.  I think it's too early to tell.  At least for those of us not named Donald.

It seems to me that with the gimped workshop aspect of hermit (gain a card costing up to 3), while you may not get all of your utility out of the turn, there certainly seem to be a lot of cards in DA that are worth getting costing <=3.
(sorry, this post was a ways back, but I thought I should read through before saying something)

[Piemaster]

All the combos in this set are making my head hurt

[Beyond Awesome]

All the combos in this set are making my head hurt

Same here. Too much to think about.

[Loschmidt]

Hermit is a card that will be much more powerful in the context of Dark Ages than in every-card Dominion. The reason being, targeted trashing. Trashing without decreasing your hand size is cool, and will be a decent use of the card outside of Dark Ages (I've decided "low-impact trashing" is a thing). But, when you're trying to hunt down and kill that one On-Trash card in your deck, Hermit can see over half your deck on average. This gives much better odds of being able to hit your target than, say, Remodel which can only target one of the other four cards in your hand.

In short, Hermit is not a actually a trasher. It is a guided missile for On-Trash abilities. This and Madman should be considered its primary purpose in life.

(This seems kinda obvious in retrospect, but I didn't notice anyone else explicitly mention it. Apologies if you're invisible.)

Yeah it occured to me in a moment of fridge brilliance that the discard-filtering-trasher wasn't just a cute new ability but as you say a guided missile for on-trash abilities. Also combos with chancellor! Hooray, I love things that make my favourite under achievers better.

We've seen only 9 cards so far and we've all already exploded with combo-tastic ideas. This is indeed the Johnny expansion. I'm glad I didn't see all of these cards at once, it would have been too much to handle.

[shraeye]

Hermit is a card that will be much more powerful in the context of Dark Ages than in every-card Dominion. The reason being, targeted trashing. Trashing without decreasing your hand size is cool, and will be a decent use of the card outside of Dark Ages (I've decided "low-impact trashing" is a thing). But, when you're trying to hunt down and kill that one On-Trash card in your deck, Hermit can see over half your deck on average. This gives much better odds of being able to hit your target than, say, Remodel which can only target one of the other four cards in your hand.

In short, Hermit is not a actually a trasher. It is a guided missile for On-Trash abilities. This and Madman should be considered its primary purpose in life.

(This seems kinda obvious in retrospect, but I didn't notice anyone else explicitly mention it. Apologies if you're invisible.)

Yeah it occured to me in a moment of fridge brilliance that the discard-filtering-trasher wasn't just a cute new ability but as you say a guided missile for on-trash abilities.

Oh man, that hadn't even hit me yet.  Spot on, sirs!  Now I really want to play with Hermit and any/all on-trash Dark Ages cards.

[ashersky]

Yeah it occured to me in a moment of fridge brilliance that the discard-filtering-trasher wasn't just a cute new ability but as you say a guided missile for on-trash abilities. Also combos with chancellor! Hooray, I love things that make my favourite under achievers better.

The Chancellor combo definitely makes my day.  Flip your deck, trash what you want.

[werothegreat]

Yeah it occured to me in a moment of fridge brilliance that the discard-filtering-trasher wasn't just a cute new ability but as you say a guided missile for on-trash abilities. Also combos with chancellor! Hooray, I love things that make my favourite under achievers better.

The Chancellor combo definitely makes my day.  Flip your deck, trash what you want.

Opening Chancellor/Hermit would be problematic, though.

[Davio]

I like Madman's art, but I was hoping for something more simplistic, e.g.,



(Come on, please don't tell me I'm the only one who thought of that upon seeing Madman.)

I actually thought of Mudmen as I played Small World a couple of weeks ago.

[rinkworks]

I'm wondering if the "don't buy anything" penalty of getting a Madman is really all that big of a deal.  Would it feel as much like a penalty if it said, "You may buy a Madman with all of your coins this turn" instead?  Yes, I know the wording of the rule has unworkable loopholes.  My point is that such a turn is rather like outright buying a Madman, rather than getting one as a reward for skipping a purchase.

[werothegreat]

I'm wondering if the "don't buy anything" penalty of getting a Madman is really all that big of a deal.  Would it feel as much like a penalty if it said, "You may buy a Madman with all of your coins this turn" instead?  Yes, I know the wording of the rule has unworkable loopholes.  My point is that such a turn is rather like outright buying a Madman, rather than getting one as a reward for skipping a purchase.

Hermit/Tactician - you won't be buying anything the turn you discard for Tactician (most of the time) anyway.

[zahlman]

I'm wondering if the "don't buy anything" penalty of getting a Madman is really all that big of a deal.  Would it feel as much like a penalty if it said, "You may buy a Madman with all of your coins this turn" instead?  Yes, I know the wording of the rule has unworkable loopholes.  My point is that such a turn is rather like outright buying a Madman, rather than getting one as a reward for skipping a purchase.

Yeah, well, sometimes you buy an Apothecary with $<somewhat disturbingly large number>P and no +Buy, too.

(As written, it seems you can't get around Hermit with Black Market, the way you can with Tactician...)

[joel88s]

Note Hermit (paraphrase) says "Trash me.  Gain a Madman."  This is similar to Feast, which is why it can be TR/KC'd.  If it said "Trash me.  IF YOU DO, gain a Madman," then the Scheme trick wouldn't work.

Thanks all for the answers on this. This is exactly the issue, how you parse 'trash this and gain a Madman". What you and others are saying when you equate it to 'Trash me. Gain a Madman.', and confirmed by Him Who Knows All, is that we read this as two totally separate instructions, resolved independently and sequentially. And I understand that this literal, flow-chart mode is the one we use for Dominion cards, and that by convention the phrase 'if you do' is required to indicate causality or consequentially. And that's totally fine, and actually quite clear.

What I was merely suggesting, or really just musing, is that there can also be other ways of parsing a phrase. So in this case I would submit that in a sematic sense, meaning in the way we tend to understand English in everyday use, one could argue that 'trash this and gain a Madman' does imply at least some level of consequentially; more to my ear than something like Jack of All Trades's "Gain a silver. Draw till you have five cards. Go make a sandwich. etc." Again compare my example "stop by the store on the way home and pick up some milk": the connectedness of the two commands is obviously implied, and if I came home saying the (theoretically one and only) store was closed, I don't think you would then ask me why I didn't still perform the second command and bring home milk.

Further one could maybe argue that in a thematic mode, 'trash this and gain a Madman' really means the Hermit becomes a Madman, in the manner Donald X. himself so eloquently decribes, even though yes I know it doesn't say that explicitly. In fact, at the risk of going all Clintonian, it seems to me that in the flow-chart mode vs. the semantic/thematic mode of interpretation the meaning of the word 'and' is actually slightly different! In short, mathematically it of course implies no relationship between two events, but in colloquial usage maybe it sometimes does.

Again though this is just reflection, and not at all to dispute the primacy of the flow-chart mode for this and other Dominion cards, and its likely necessity to avoid total craziness and paradox in certain situations.

[werothegreat]

And this is why new players should avoid Hinterlands and Dark Ages at ALL COSTS.  Particularly the combination of the two.

[zahlman]

What I was merely suggesting, or really just musing, is that there can also be other ways of parsing a phrase. So in this case I would submit that in a sematic sense, meaning in the way we tend to understand English in everyday use, one could argue that 'trash this and gain a Madman' does imply at least some level of consequentially; more to my ear than something like Jack of All Trades's "Gain a silver. Draw till you have five cards. Go make a sandwich. etc." Again compare my example "stop by the store on the way home and pick up some milk": the connectedness of the two commands is obviously implied, and if I came home saying the (theoretically one and only) store was closed, I don't think you would then ask me why I didn't still perform the second command and bring home milk.

But you did perform the second command. You did as much milk-bringing-home as you could.

[joel88s]

What I was merely suggesting, or really just musing, is that there can also be other ways of parsing a phrase. So in this case I would submit that in a sematic sense, meaning in the way we tend to understand English in everyday use, one could argue that 'trash this and gain a Madman' does imply at least some level of consequentially; more to my ear than something like Jack of All Trades's "Gain a silver. Draw till you have five cards. Go make a sandwich. etc." Again compare my example "stop by the store on the way home and pick up some milk": the connectedness of the two commands is obviously implied, and if I came home saying the (theoretically one and only) store was closed, I don't think you would then ask me why I didn't still perform the second command and bring home milk.

But you did perform the second command. You did as much milk-bringing-home as you could.

Certainly true, or more precisely I tried and failed. But I failed in the second because I failed in the first. My analogy is just that in that phraseology, in that instance anyway, we understand implicitly that the second can only follow from the first.   

[ftl]

Well, but we do that not just because of the phrasing, but because of the content - because we know you get milk at a store, and so if the store is closed you can't get milk.

Compare "stop by the store on the way home and pick up some milk" with "stop by the the store on the way home and stop by the gas station". Same structure, but now it is obvious that "stop by the gas station" and "stop by the store" are independent and are just two things that you need to do.

[joel88s]

Precisely! You can't tell purely from the structure which it is, you have to interpret the content. We know milk comes from the store, so if you can't go to the store you can't get milk. And we could say likewise 'we know Madmen come from trashed Hermits, so if you can't trash the Hermit you can't get the Madman.' Or we can say the trashing and gaining are like stopping and the gas station and stopping at the store, independent. I guess we choose the more literal reading, in general because with card rules it's safer and more sensible not to start making intuitive inferences - ultimately we don't understand the relationship of Hermits and Madmen as well as we do that of grocery stores and milk - and of course in particular here because we have an official ruling.

EDIT:... or maybe more precisely because we have an accepted code for conditionality, 'if you do', so on principle we don't accept conditionality without it.

[jotheonah]

Isn't this exactly what the famous Blue Dog debate was about?

[clb]

Precisely! You can't tell purely from the structure which it is, you have to interpret the content. We know milk comes from the store, so if you can't go to the store you can't get milk. And we could say likewise 'we know Madmen come from trashed Hermits, so if you can't trash the Hermit you can't get the Madman.' Or we can say the trashing and gaining are like stopping and the gas station and stopping at the store, independent. I guess we choose the more literal reading, in general because with card rules it's safer and more sensible not to start making intuitive inferences - ultimately we don't understand the relationship of Hermits and Madmen as well as we do that of grocery stores and milk - and of course in particular here because we have an official ruling.

EDIT:... or maybe more precisely because we have an accepted code for conditionality, 'if you do', so on principle we don't accept conditionality without it.

Or cows, sheep, goats, soy beans, or other more adventurous sources... Stores are the easy way to get milk, as trashing hermits is the easy way to get madmen, but if you want it bad enough, there are alternate routes.
I just thought I would throw that out there.

[joel88s]

No question, this was a strictly urban analogy!

[joel88s]

Isn't this exactly what the famous Blue Dog debate was about?

Oh God help us all.
Funny, clb just referred to that over on the Preview #4 board - not sure if that's a coincidence.
I think that was more about sequence of events, while this is more about conditionality. But if what you really mean is that it's equally annoying, you're probably right about that!

[Loschmidt]

I really hope that there's another card that turns into Madman. Ruins are cool because 3 different cards hand them out, spoils are cool because 3 different cards can get you them. But the idea that there's a stack of cards just for one other stack of cards to turn into seems like a wasted opportunity.

Fingers crossed you can make other cards go mad

[LastFootnote]

I really hope that there's another card that turns into Madman. Ruins are cool because 3 different cards hand them out, spoils are cool because 3 different cards can get you them. But the idea that there's a stack of cards just for one other stack of cards to turn into seems like a wasted opportunity.

Fingers crossed you can make other cards go mad

I wouldn't get your hopes up. I think Donald would have mentioned if that were the case. That being said, I like the fact that Madman can only be obtained through one other card. I was hoping that there were going to be more than two cards like that. But Spoils has definitely mollified me. It's a good compromise.

I am hoping that the final non-kingdom card isn't a one-shot, but I'll be perfectly happy if it is.

[werothegreat]

I really hope that there's another card that turns into Madman. Ruins are cool because 3 different cards hand them out, spoils are cool because 3 different cards can get you them. But the idea that there's a stack of cards just for one other stack of cards to turn into seems like a wasted opportunity.

Fingers crossed you can make other cards go mad

I wouldn't get your hopes up. I think Donald would have mentioned if that were the case. That being said, I like the fact that Madman can only be obtained through one other card. I was hoping that there were going to be more than two cards like that. But Spoils has definitely mollified me. It's a good compromise.

I am hoping that the final non-kingdom card isn't a one-shot, but I'll be perfectly happy if it is.

This still leaves 21 Kingdom cards with mechanics that we have absolutely no inkling of.

[jotheonah]

FWIW, I was expecting the upgradable cards to be more like a more complex City - or like the heroes in THunderstone. So that's still a possibility.

[Loschmidt]

FWIW, I was expecting the upgradable cards to be more like a more complex City - or like the heroes in THunderstone. So that's still a possibility.

A card like that would be cool. How would you upgrade them? It could count the trash and then level up at some point, but stopping to count how many cards are in the trash in annoying... Hmmm

[rinkworks]

FWIW, I was expecting the upgradable cards to be more like a more complex City - or like the heroes in THunderstone. So that's still a possibility.

A card like that would be cool. How would you upgrade them? It could count the trash and then level up at some point, but stopping to count how many cards are in the trash in annoying... Hmmm

I'm expecting ALL of Guilds to be a sequential upgrading chain of 13 or so cards.  You're only allowed to buy one of them, and then you switch them out all the way up to the top.

That would be a good expansion, right?

[CaptainNevada]

Actually, I was thinking that while Dark Ages is a counterpoint to both Prosperity (Dark Ages seems to have a poverty theme) and Hinterlands (Trashing verses Gaining) Guilds would be be a counterpoint to Cornucopia (reward you for multiple copies of a card instead of a variety of cards).  Guilds would set standards and prices of goods and services.  So the initial cost might be higher but the rewards of multiple cards (representing more control over a specific good or service) might get better. 

Treasure map needs two copies of it to pull off.  Conspirators chain well but the rewards after they kick in are consistent.  A second Fools Gold is much better than the first. 

Funny Hat Guild ($4 - Action)
+1 Action 
+1 Card for Each Copy of Funny Hat Guild in Play

FWIW, I was expecting the upgradable cards to be more like a more complex City - or like the heroes in THunderstone. So that's still a possibility.

A card like that would be cool. How would you upgrade them? It could count the trash and then level up at some point, but stopping to count how many cards are in the trash in annoying... Hmmm

I'm expecting ALL of Guilds to be a sequential upgrading chain of 13 or so cards.  You're only allowed to buy one of them, and then you switch them out all the way up to the top.

That would be a good expansion, right?

[Schneau]

FWIW, I was expecting the upgradable cards to be more like a more complex City - or like the heroes in THunderstone. So that's still a possibility.

A card like that would be cool. How would you upgrade them? It could count the trash and then level up at some point, but stopping to count how many cards are in the trash in annoying... Hmmm

I'm expecting ALL of Guilds to be a sequential upgrading chain of 13 or so cards.  You're only allowed to buy one of them, and then you switch them out all the way up to the top.

That would be a good expansion, right?

+1 for sarcasm. That's sarcasm, right? If not, I'm retroactively removing my +1.

[zahlman]

Funny Hat Guild ($4 - Action)
+1 Action 
+1 Card for Each Copy of Funny Hat Guild in Play

I think something similar got submitted to the potion-cost contest...

[NoMoreFun]

Not sure if this has been mentioned, but Mint/Squire seems like a good opening. You can get your mint economy going quite quickly with the silver gain, and unless your shuffle luck and you can usually get another squire (or even another silver) with the $1. In games with shelters the necropolis will help accelerate this process.

[Tmwinand]

I'm really hoping to see some more attack cards in DA for Squire to aspire to.

[Loschmidt]

The more I think about Hermit the more I think it has real power card potential.

The ability to trash from the discard means that it's the first trasher that doesn't need to be matched up with its targets, in fact it's better if they don't.

You could potentially use it as a Jack variant; gain a silver every turn, the better trashing should make up to some degree for the lack of sifting/draw. It'll be a lot better in engines than Jack, after you've got the engine parts you can literally go mad.

[engineer]

I'm really hoping to see some more attack cards in DA for Squire to aspire to.

I'm guessing there will be a "beggar" attack card:

Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a treasure from their hand (or reveals a hand with no treasure).  If any treasures were discarded in this way, +$2.

Something of that nature.

[CaptainNevada]

Very close to Cutpurse.

I'm really hoping to see some more attack cards in DA for Squire to aspire to.

I'm guessing there will be a "beggar" attack card:

Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a treasure from their hand (or reveals a hand with no treasure).  If any treasures were discarded in this way, +$2.

Something of that nature.

[Loschmidt]

I'm really hoping to see some more attack cards in DA for Squire to aspire to.

I'm betting on a thief variant that gains you spoils

[eHalcyon]

I'm really hoping to see some more attack cards in DA for Squire to aspire to.

I'm betting on a thief variant that gains you spoils

You know the whole set has been spoiled now, right? Pun intended!