Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
13 Posts

Alchemists» Forums » Rules

Subject: debunk your own theory question rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Mihai Iliescu
msg tools
Hi

What happens if I wish to remove/replace a seal I have put on an ingredient, which I now know it is ok, and it is ok -as I have earlier added a seal with a question mark for a colour ?
Is there any way to remove that seal through debunk theory, and change it with another of your own. Because with debunk,if the chosen ingredient is correct, if what the token is correct u do not remove the seals.
This happens if you added a seal earlier in a game, weren't 100% sure , you guessed the correct answer, added it, and u are now 100% sure and u wish to replace it with a 5star one
Can this be done via rebunk thoery, or publish theory to replace it ?

I find it logical to be able to replace it:
- via debunk or publish, in order to improve your theory, not be stucl
- not beeing able to replace/remove your seal, in case u guessed the correct token/ingredient, is counterproductive. I mean if u guessed it wrongly, u are allowed to change it via debunk, so it is better to be wrong, than to be right in the 1st place. Which means it is better to put a wrong answer, so that u may replace it later - thus u gain -3 (for debunk thoery) + 5 (seal stars in the end game)= +2 reputation in the end. In case your theory is correct, u can not debunk or republish, and u get nothing in the end.
So as I said +2 vs 0 (base points not counting artefacts) in case u are wrong, is very "strange"
Not to mention in the real world u are allowed to remake/improve yoru own theories.
Thank you
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joseph Cochran
United States
Costa Mesa
California
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmb
In order to successfully debunk you have to prove the theory wrong. If you can't prove it wrong you can't debunk.

One of the risks of hedging an early publish is that you're actually right and are stuck with no bonus points there. I'm aware of no way to go back on it in the rules.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Schwarz
Germany
Siegen
NRW
flag msg tools
GLOOOOOOOOOOOOOMHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVEN!!!!!!!!!!!
badge
maybe on the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You could say that storywise the book has already been written and published, so its out there. In case it is right, there is nothing to improve, because the book IS still right, afterall.

Only if the book contains some inconsistencies, you can go and improve it.

And directly after a book is published, you go and brag about it to your professor or you use it in another important work (or not), so you cannot really change that later and have to either live with the repercussions of a wrong theory (and the spite of your colleagues who believed you) or you have to live with not using the "hype" about the new theory enough to further your cause while it was still hot news!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mihai Iliescu
msg tools
Well i dont wish to prove anything about the theory just how much i bet on it after some time. I understood the reason behind not allowing-before your posts but and even more after, but i wondering on the finetunning of the points. As i said i would expect that pubishing a good theory with a question mark seal is worth more than publishing a wrong one debunking and republishing. U really do get more rep points for the later even though the thought process-the academic work -is more and better in the 1st case. As i said a bit counterintuitive from this pont of view. It rewards more beeing wrong and less thoughtfull. Being able to change a seal via republishing would mean u getting +5 vs the +2 u get in the 2nd case. U could even make it cost more gold and maybe some rep. To simplify the scholar who was right 1st via thinking should get more than the one who was wrong right. Not sure on the mechanics and points -as i said your reasoning is ok, u cant rebuke a good one but u should republish a better one , or bet more on yours.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mihai Iliescu
msg tools
And i think it is +3 since u get a +1 after the republish. It rewards fast publishers not more correct ones- i am also not sure if u miss out 2 colours/signsfrom an ingredient. U debunk only one u still get +3 (-3 +5+1) when u add one where u where right only one out of 3. Not to mention u dont loose much if u test the one where u put the question mark. Since u dont test the 2wrong one. In the end the person who publishes one with 2wrongs gets more rewards . I also wonder if one shouldnt loose the reward with 2gold 2 rep if anyone succesfully rebunks a theory
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Schwarz
Germany
Siegen
NRW
flag msg tools
GLOOOOOOOOOOOOOMHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAVEN!!!!!!!!!!!
badge
maybe on the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one....
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Not having played the game yet, I can only speculate on how this plays out.
Since there is an alchemist convention event in the middle of the game, where you gain points for publishing, I would guess that this is by design (or at least it was tolerated and deemed a non-issue) and you are meant to publish early (and the points example you gave seems to support that, since it is more advantageous in that regard, too).

I guess the earlier players are inclined to publish, the more (albeit unsafe) information is available to all players earlier in the game. Otherwise some players would keep all their information to themselves until they have perfect knowledge and only publish then. This would lead to a situation where you would almost only gain new knowledge through your own actions and almost none from the actions of others and I think it is not intended that you "turtle" that much in this game, but that you guess and second guess the actions and publications of others
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paulo Renato
Portugal
Vila Nova Gaia
Porto
flag msg tools
I run through Rahdo's Runthroughs and make right what once went wrong (via annotations)
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ilici wrote:
And i think it is +3 since u get a +1 after the republish. It rewards fast publishers not more correct ones- i am also not sure if u miss out 2 colours/signsfrom an ingredient. U debunk only one u still get +3 (-3 +5+1) when u add one where u where right only one out of 3. Not to mention u dont loose much if u test the one where u put the question mark. Since u dont test the 2wrong one. In the end the person who publishes one with 2wrongs gets more rewards . I also wonder if one shouldnt loose the reward with 2gold 2 rep if anyone succesfully rebunks a theory


It only rewards fast publishers instead of correct ones if they are the ones to debunk their own theory and if they hedged the first theory the right way...

If they didn't hedge it right they will lose reputation for it and if they aren't the ones to debunk their own theory they will lose reputation, another player will gain reputation and will be able to publish a theory for free...

So it's a big big gamble to just publish theories without having information just to publish them and hopefully be the one to debunk them...

Try it in a game with good players and let us know the result...


It wouldn't make any sense to be able to change the seal in a published theory that was right... If it's already right what are you improving on that theory???
You either risk it earlier or you wait until you have more info and then be certain when you publish or endorse an already published theory, or debunk one.

All makes sense
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
titi gaganu
Romania
flag msg tools
Yes, it is like coming late to your own party.
Everybody is already passed out (from trying - minus - potions on themselves or whatever).
It is still your party and everybody has enjoyed it because of you but you get no credit for it and you can`t catch up with the rest and get any points of reputation for your shenanigans.
So yes, once a correct theory has been proven correct and you wagered something on in being correct you can no longer come back and reprove it correct by trying to prove it incorrect in order to re-wager what you`ve wagered.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mihai Iliescu
msg tools
Yes, exactly as I supposed. It is a risk rewarding game not a scholar/thinking one. You do 1 test, u publish wrongly, u debunk/test what u put with a question mark, u dont loose anything, u republish and get +5 . This is the strategy u need to take in order to win .
Publish fast, whatever u can, or else lose. Unfortunatelly this doesn't resemble the academic/alchemy world too well for me, but it is more fun.
And better suited for a faster pace game
Tried and tested in a live game with good players

PS didnt think it's a party game, but an alchemy one
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paulo Renato
Portugal
Vila Nova Gaia
Porto
flag msg tools
I run through Rahdo's Runthroughs and make right what once went wrong (via annotations)
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't agree with you but everyone is entitled to their opinion...

You can't just go around guessing theories and debunking on guessing...

if you do that you'll be losing a lot lot of points...

I would bet that a player that takes his time and gathers info will do better 99% of the time than one that just publishes for the sake of publishing and debunking his own theories...

and you can't forget that the other players can also debunk your rushed theories and you'll be left hanging and losing points...

but I see you have your opinion formed and that's that
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
titi gaganu
Romania
flag msg tools
I actually disagree with you,
It is exactly like real life scholar/research. First you make a halfway research, then you publish your findings, then you test it on students or in case of drugs on entire populations, then you get a lot of money and chicks and cool stuff (like big screen TVs and hot tubes and samurai swords) and after that somebody else comes along and discovers that the acne pill you`ve discovered and used on 143 million individual is actually causing cancer as a secondary effect.
But of course you must race and publish you acne pill research before somebody else will publish it and get all the money and chicks and cool stuff , so yeah, it’s exactly like that.
It is possible for you to go back and say “yes I made a mistake but I am human and I can repair it” because you can still get more money and stuff and the chicks will still dig you.
But if you go and say “you know, my theory is very good, I have nothing to improve about it, but I want more money and stuff and hotter chicks”, people will not take you serious.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Schweiger
Spain
Madrid
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Muse23PT wrote:
[...]

If they didn't hedge it right they will lose reputation for it and if they aren't the ones to debunk their own theory they will lose reputation, another player will gain reputation and will be able to publish a theory for free...


I completely agree with your point of view but for the part pointed out in the quote.

As you need to have an action cube in the Publish Theory action space, I assumed you also have to pay for the Immediate Publication. The only advantage would be doing it before the game action reaches that space, so before anyone else can publish on that matter.
Anycase it's true that this is neither specifically denied nor agreed in the rules...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Larry Schneider
United States
Connecticut
flag msg tools
I am quite late coming to this thread, but I arrived here because I, too, wanted to know how to change a seal on a theory that's correct.

As it turns out, there is one way to do it...sort of.

If you can get your hands on the "Publisher" promo favor, I believe that card allows you to change a seal on an existing theory. I've only seen it in German (as far as I know, it hasn't yet been published in English), and not knowing German myself and having to rely on Google translate, I think that's what the card sets out to accomplish.

If you can't find the promo, I suppose you can always try and make it. Too bad the game doesn't come with a blank favor card...then it would be a piece of cake!

I suppose you can always convert one of the existing favors to the Publisher. The Assistant or Herbalist would be good contenders since there's 4 each of those cards in the deck.

Of course, having the Publisher in the deck doesn't guarantee that you'll get it in your hand! But I'm tempted to make one (or two!) myself just for this purpose. Perhaps I'll convert 1 Assistant and 1 Herbalist each!

Thinking about it...
 
 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.