$10.00
Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

Dominion: Hinterlands» Forums » Rules

Subject: Develop/Trader rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Annick Weyzig
Netherlands
Woerden
Utrecht
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Something we came across yesterday when playing with Hinterlands for the first time...

When you use Develop to trash an Estate, can you use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a non-existent card costing 1?

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Watne
United States
Burlington
Washington
flag msg tools
Good times.
mbmbmbmbmb
foppe wrote:

When you use Develop to trash an Estate, can you use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a non-existent card costing 1?



Good question.

I do not believe you can. The general rule with Dominion is that cards requiring you to gain something include an implied "if able". Develop tells you to gain a card costing exactly 1 less "if able". Trader allows you to gain a Silver instead of another card gained. Since you are unable to gain a 1-cost card via Develop, there is nothing for Trader to replace with a Silver.

That would have been a smooth trick, though.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Newton
United Kingdom
Wiltshire
flag msg tools
In the interest of giving credit where credit is due, my avatar is a scan of a hand-drawn caricature by cartoonist Jim Naylor which was done at my company's 20th anniversary dinner.
mbmbmbmbmb
foppe wrote:
Something we came across yesterday when playing with Hinterlands for the first time...

When you use Develop to trash an Estate, can you use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a non-existent card costing 1?

I'm sure the answer to this one is no.

There was a lengthy debate a while back about whether you could use Trader to gain a real Silver instead of failing to gain, say, a Curse from an empty Curse pile; and while there was much discussion about the meaning and usage of the word "would", everyone agreed that in practice (and from the FAQ) you can only use Trader's reaction when you would really gain a card without using it.

In other words, you cannot use Trader to gain a Silver instead of something from an empty pile. In the same way you cannot use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a non-existent card.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate S
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
You can safely ignore what I'm about to say and go by churchmouse's excellent summary of the earlier "lengthy debate" if you are not (as I am) obsessed with the minutiae of complex card interactions in Dominion.

churchmouse wrote:
you can only use Trader's reaction when you would really gain a card without using it.

This is 99% right, and 100% right if you ignore Possession (and any other future cards that might have this "when you would gain" wording). I find the easiest way to think about "would-gain" effects is that you go about gaining a card in several distinct time steps:

1. Some effect tells you to gain a card - could be buying the card, Workshop, Thief, an opponent's Witch, whatever.
2. You make sure the card is available to gain - that is, there is actually a copy of the card wherever you're being told to gain it from.
3. Now it's "when you would gain a card", since you know you are right on the cusp of actually gaining the card.
4. Now (if no effect intervenes to prevent it) you actually gain the card. Subsequently (and not before), "when you gain a card" effects can occur.

There are many cards that trigger on step #4 (like Watchtower, Border Village, Royal Seal, etc.), but there are currently only two cards (Trader and Possession) that trigger on step #3, "when you would gain a card".

In short, there is currently one instance when you can reveal a Trader even though you would never have gained a card without revealing a Trader: If you are being Possessed. Here's an example:

1. Alice Possesses Bob.
2. Alice makes Bob buy a Copper.
3. Bob has a Trader in hand. Alice can make Bob reveal the Trader to gain a Silver instead of a Copper (even though Bob would never have actually gained the Copper - Alice would eventually have gained it instead).
4. Possession makes Alice gain the Silver instead of Bob.

Future "when you would gain" cards might add more exceptions.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wolfe
United States
Columbus
Ohio
flag msg tools
Zendo fan, Columbus Blue Jackets fan, Dominion Fan. These are 'permanent microbadges' to free up space on my microbadge row
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I would not call Possession an exception. I would call the interaction between Possession and Trader an example of "when two things try to happen at the same time."
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nate S
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
jeffwolfe wrote:
I would not call Possession an exception. I would call the interaction between Possession and Trader an example of "when two things try to happen at the same time."

It's an exception to churchmouse's stated rule-of-thumb that you can't react with Trader unless you would actually gain the card without revealing Trader. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I don't think it's an exception to any actual game mechanic, just an exception to that shortcut rule-of-thumb.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ronnie
United States
Carrollton
Texas
flag msg tools
We wanna be free. We wanna be free to do what we wanna do. And we wanna play games. And we wanna have a good time. And that's what we're gonna do. We're gonna have a good time; We're gonna have a party...
mbmbmbmbmb
foppe wrote:
Something we came across yesterday when playing with Hinterlands for the first time...

When you use Develop to trash an Estate, can you use Trader to gain a Silver instead of a non-existent card costing 1?



SIDE NOTE: this would work if you had a bridge/Highway in play...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff Wolfe
United States
Columbus
Ohio
flag msg tools
Zendo fan, Columbus Blue Jackets fan, Dominion Fan. These are 'permanent microbadges' to free up space on my microbadge row
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
ghorsche wrote:
jeffwolfe wrote:
I would not call Possession an exception. I would call the interaction between Possession and Trader an example of "when two things try to happen at the same time."

It's an exception to churchmouse's stated rule-of-thumb that you can't react with Trader unless you would actually gain the card without revealing Trader. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

I don't think it's an exception to any actual game mechanic, just an exception to that shortcut rule-of-thumb.

I was making a fine semantic distinction that's probably more confusing than helpful. Things don't happen in the future, but people are likely to project into the future when considering Possession and Trader. If it helps people to think of it as an exception, then I'm not going to argue the point further.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Crawford
United States
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Discussed at length here:
http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/713344/question-about-develo...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.