Print

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

[GendoIkari]

http://dominion.diehrstraits.com/comix.php

Can anyone explain the "our interpretation of the missing rules" one?

[Brando Commando]

42. People who already have Gold have a much easier time getting more of it. Why? Because the rich get richer, and the poor are Cursed.

[shMerker]

http://dominion.diehrstraits.com/comix.php

Can anyone explain the "our interpretation of the missing rules" one?

I think it might have something to do with how a lot of people are confused by curses when first introduced to the game, assuming that they must have some purpose when Witch isn't in play and then going "Well you can buy them, but you would never want to" which ultimately leads to projecting some kind of house rule into that confusion like being able to buy curses into other players' decks.

[Donald X.]

I think it might have something to do with how a lot of people are confused by curses when first introduced to the game, assuming that they must have some purpose when Witch isn't in play and then going "Well you can buy them, but you would never want to" which ultimately leads to projecting some kind of house rule into that confusion like being able to buy curses into other players' decks.

Yes, this is it. There were a few people at once saying "oh you must buy Curses into your opponent's deck."

The "silver test" one is specifically mocking baba44713 (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/370572/from-indifference-through-exuberance-to-dissapoint).

[michaeljb]

Silly baba, the real way to play is with the Scout test: whenever you have 4 coins or more to spend, buy a Scout, or a card better than Scout.

[Tables]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

[dondon151]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

[popsofctown]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

This post saved me from making an embarrasing post.

[Schneau]

Silly baba, the real way to play is with the Scout test: whenever you have 4 coins or more to spend, buy a Scout, or a card better than Scout.

Ex: Silver

[Davio]

I think it might have something to do with how a lot of people are confused by curses when first introduced to the game, assuming that they must have some purpose when Witch isn't in play and then going "Well you can buy them, but you would never want to" which ultimately leads to projecting some kind of house rule into that confusion like being able to buy curses into other players' decks.

Yes, this is it. There were a few people at once saying "oh you must buy Curses into your opponent's deck."

The "silver test" one is specifically mocking baba44713 (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/370572/from-indifference-through-exuberance-to-dissapoint).

I wonder if this is an accurate portrait of Donald:

[Tables]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

In fact, I had redundancy in there, since I said it's usually true that silvers are almost always better than nothing .

What I don't really get is why that got 5 respect . I mean, really, a comment about be not making a mistake? I should be offended.

[GendoIkari]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

In fact, I had redundancy in there, since I said it's usually true that silvers are almost always better than nothing .

What I don't really get is why that got 5 respect . I mean, really, a comment about be not making a mistake? I should be offended.

The comment was funny because he was all set to point out an edge case where it wasn't actually true, but because you said "almost", there was no need to contradict it with an edge case.

[dondon151]

In fact, I had redundancy in there, since I said it's usually true that silvers are almost always better than nothing .

What I don't really get is why that got 5 respect . I mean, really, a comment about be not making a mistake? I should be offended.

> Understanding why certain posts on f.DS get respect

[Titandrake]

In theory, well respected posts are ones about good Dominion Strategy.

In practice, it's more about in-jokes and memes and elaborations on the two.

If you compare this to which videos get lots of views on Youtube, you'll probably find a similar relationship, so it's all cool.

[DStu]

In theory, well respected posts are ones about good Dominion Strategy.

But from the function of the button, it's pretty clear that it acts like it does at the moment.  It's an easy way to show you liked a post without having to post a new one.  That's a pretty good function for jokes or memes, but not a pretty good function for strategy articles.  For this, you actually might to comment, or if not care enough that you write enough to really write a "thank you for this article"-post.

Expecting that the posts that get the +1s are the insightful posts is like expecting that the games where you typed "gg" and quit were the most interesting ones.

[brokoli]

"our interpretation of the missing rule" is simply crazy.
Just imagine, using this rule, market becomes an improved familiar ! 

[Davio]

"our interpretation of the missing rule" is simply crazy.
Just imagine, using this rule, market becomes an improved familiar ! 

Worker's Village.

[Qvist]

"our interpretation of the missing rule" is simply crazy.
Just imagine, using this rule, market becomes an improved familiar ! 

Worker's Village.

Squire 

[SirPeebles]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

In fact, I had redundancy in there, since I said it's usually true that silvers are almost always better than nothing .

What I don't really get is why that got 5 respect . I mean, really, a comment about be not making a mistake? I should be offended.

The board usually has the property that, when the opportunity arises, taking Silver is almost always better than taking nothing.

[petrie911]

43. With just a simple makeover, your ugly Sea Hags can become a part of your luxurious Harem.

[ConMan]

43. With just a simple makeover, your ugly Sea Hags can become a part of your luxurious Harem.

I'm pretty sure Makeover isn't an official card, unless you know something about Guilds that I don't (but it's probably about as likely to be the Roxy Music card of Guilds as Renovate).

[DStu]

The Silver test isn't very useful, but it does reveal one (usually) true Dominion principle: Silvers are almost always better than not having Silvers. Or in other words, don't buy nothing with $3.

Darn it! He said "almost!"

In fact, I had redundancy in there, since I said it's usually true that silvers are almost always better than nothing .

What I don't really get is why that got 5 respect . I mean, really, a comment about be not making a mistake? I should be offended.

The board usually has the property that, when the opportunity arises, taking Silver is almost always better than taking nothing.

The board usually has the property that it is possible to play a strategy such that, when the opportunity arises, taking Silver is almost always better than taking nothing.