Recommend
36 
 Thumb up
 Hide
220 Posts
[1]  Prev «  3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7  Next »  [9] | 

Dominion: Hinterlands» Forums » Rules

Subject: Ironworks and Trader rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Donald X.
United States
flag msg tools
designer
kevincos wrote:
I think the ruling of "C" is reasonable, but I still like "A" better. Also, I don't really like that it almost seems like the latest ruling of "C" is derived more from an analogy to feeding and walking blue dogs than it is from the actual card text. The logic there seemed to make sense for the blue dogs, but when I tried to apply it back to Ironworks, it still didn't sit right with me.

The reason I still think "A" is better has to do with the idea that the phrase "Gain a card" is a command, not a statement of fact. This is related to what happens if a card says "Gain a curse" but there is no curse. In such a case, the card that you were told to gain is a Curse, but you didn't gain a card.

So back to Ironworks, there are two things that "it" could refer to. There's the card that you gain. Or, there's the card that you were instructed to gain by ironworks. I think "it" should refer to the card you were instructed to gain, simply because Ironworks can't ever make you gain a card. Ironworks can only tell you to gain a card.

So the only card that is ever even described by Ironworks is the card that it instructed you to gain, which happens to be the card you chose from the supply. So my position is still that this is what "it" should refer to, and as a result, it shouldn't matter if you actually gain the card.
The analogies were just an attempt to make things clear to people; the ruling is based entirely on the actual card texts.

"It" refers to a card that was defined via you gaining it via Ironworks. If you didn't gain it it's undefined.

If this helps, compare Remodel with Upgrade, as I originally did. Remodel says "the trashed card" and Upgrade says "it," but the reason Upgrade is different is just because it's a natural thing to say in English that takes fewer words. "It" on Upgrade means the card you trashed (and furthermore, the card you trashed via Upgrade, not a card randomly trashed by some other card that tried to get in on the action). Similarly "it" on Ironworks means "the gained card" (more specifically the card gained via Ironworks). If you didn't gain it, it's undefined; there is no "gained card." It says "it" rather than "the gained card" but that's what "it" is referring to.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Simantov
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
donaldx wrote:
"It" refers to a card that was defined via you gaining it via Ironworks. If you didn't gain it it's undefined.
So, similar to that, Possession saying "Any card he would gain on that turn, you gain instead" means that if a Possessed player is made to play Ironworks, they get no +Card/+Action/+ from it (because the controlling player actually gained the card instead of the Possessed player).

Correct?

It sounds like the important words in the card text are "would gain" and "instead", which causes Possession to replace Ironworks' entire "[He] gain[s] a card costing up to $4" event with Possession's "you gain it instead" event. Which also explains why the gained card goes into the controlling player's discard pile, even if it otherwise would go into the player's deck or hand.

Trader has the same "would gain" and "instead" phrasing, and so analogously changes the event from "[You] gain a card costing up to $4" to a "[You] gain a Silver instead" event. Which is why Ironworks can no longer be involved once that happens.

Watchtower has no "would gain" and "instead" phrasing when trashing a card, so the card actually is gained and then trashed, which is why if you play Ironworks and reveal Watchtower to trash the card you gain, you still get the bonus from Ironworks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dane Maslen
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
I've found this thread very entertaining. When I first saw the question, my immediate reaction was to opt for B. Then I read some of the early replies and realised that that was a completely untenable option. I then tended towards A and found all of the arguments (including Donald's after he switched from C) in its favour very convincing. Having had time to consider the ruling in favour of C, I'm now even more convinced by the arguments in its favour!

Ultimately what convinced me was to imagine a conversation between Ironworks (look, if we can have blue dogs and pink elephants, we can have talking cards) and a somewhat slow-witted person playing it.

Ironworks: Gain a card costing up to $4.
Player: OK. I've done that.
Ironworks: If it is...
Player: If what is?
Ironworks: The card.
Player: What card?
Ironworks: The card that you just gained.
Player: Gained how?
Ironworks: Oh, for crying out loud, the card that you just gained by playing me!

At which point it seems to me that the "it" in "If it is..." clearly has to mean "the card that you gained by playing Ironworks is..." (admittedly our slow-witted player could have gone on to ask questions like "When did I gain it?" and "Where did I gain it?" but Ironworks would rightly have pointed out that the time of day and location in which it is being played have no bearing on the rules of the game).

Once one parses the instruction as "If the card that you gained by playing Ironworks is..." then:

* If it wasn't you that gained the card, nothing happens (so that's the Possession ruling).

* If the card that you gained wasn't gained by playing Ironworks, nothing happens (so that's the Trader ruling).

For heavens sake, please no one make Donald change his mind again. I don't think I could cope with having to re-convince myself of any other line of argument!
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Donald X.
United States
flag msg tools
designer
danemaslen wrote:
For heavens sake, please no one make Donald change his mind again. I don't think I could cope with having to re-convince myself of any other line of argument!
Yeah, sorry to everyone who convinced themselves that what I was saying must be reasonable, then saw me switch.

Anyway we got through this together, that's the important thing.
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas Brendel
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So what we end up with is, revealing Trader on Ironworks lets you gain a card you could have gotten anyway, without the bonus that would have gone with it, so you probably don't ever want to.

Well, the kind of guy I am, you tell me I probably don't ever want to do something and I'll try to come up with a situation when I might. Here's the best I can come up with:

You want to play Ironworks just to play it (to trigger Conspirators, or boost Horn of Plenty, or reduce the cost of Peddler), but you don't actually want to add any more cheap cards to your deck. Silvers have run out (seems more likely with Trader). You can't choose an empty pile for Ironworks, but you can choose something valid and reveal your Trader to "gain Silver instead." Crazy corner case, I know, but it's the best I've got.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Compulsive Completist
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Someone just tell me when Ironworks 2.0 comes out.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
NtN Scissors
Singapore
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Squidd wrote:
So what we end up with is, revealing Trader on Ironworks lets you gain a card you could have gotten anyway, without the bonus that would have gone with it, so you probably don't ever want to.

Well, the kind of guy I am, you tell me I probably don't ever want to do something and I'll try to come up with a situation when I might. Here's the best I can come up with:

You want to play Ironworks just to play it (to trigger Conspirators, or boost Horn of Plenty, or reduce the cost of Peddler), but you don't actually want to add any more cheap cards to your deck. Silvers have run out (seems more likely with Trader). You can't choose an empty pile for Ironworks, but you can choose something valid and reveal your Trader to "gain Silver instead." Crazy corner case, I know, but it's the best I've got.
Corner cases are the best thing about this game, because I suck at actually, you know, playing it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Vince Lupo
United States
ALEXANDRIA
Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Quote:
Neo42 wrote:
From the manual:
"if something would have happened due to gaining the other card; it does not happen"


I don't remember the text of or care about the card Possession.



But for now we have to play it one way or the other, so I'll rule it like C in my group.


For me it's as if the gain of ironworks never happened and therefore, the benefit that would have been gained from choosing that type(s) of card doesn't happen.

I think that's the original intent behind the FAQ's wording. And Donald is trying his honorable best to make sure card or FAQ errata doesn't need to happen.



I do see the logic of different wording "Gain a card. If you do, if the card is blah blah blah" but also it's kinda terrible wording because 1) that version implies that gaining that card is optional, which it's not, and 2) normally you simply gain a card.



And thought of another way (thematically):

A Duke of the land tells his men to start building something using an ironworks. They decide to create parts needed for a great hall. And normally when the ironworker finishes this, he feels a great surge of productivity and people notice his great work so he's even more productive that week. BUT this week, before the ironworker gets started a Trader comes to town and convinces the Duke to trade that ironworker's time for a Silver mine. So the ironworker goes and helps the Trader for that week and the Trader signs away the deed of the silver mine to the Duke. Ironworker never built that great hall or felt that surge of productivity. Instead he had to do some lame stuff for the Trader all week, like moving boxes of indigo and tobacco and such (wait that's Puerto Rico).
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mark barbieri
msg tools
mbmbmb
Sorry everyone.

I don't know if I missed it or if it is not here, so I have to ask ...

Why doesn't this situation trigger the rule about two things happening at once? It looks like two on-gain effects.

I would have no problem with this: After I dropped a Great Hall into my discard pile and collected +1 Action and +1 Card, a Trader walked up and said, "You're just going to discard that perfectly good Great Hall? I'll give you a Silver for it."


Does the wording on Trader ("would gain" and "instead") cause an interrupt in play and force Trader to be resolved first? In which case, I still prefer to look at "it is" vs "it". The whole "feed a blue dog" thing doesn't cover it for me. I think, "feed an animal and do something with the recently fed animal," is better. If it is a dog, walk it. If it is a horse, ride it. If it is a dragon, slay it. Whatever. If you intend to feed and walk a dog but drop the food and the horse eats it, well, looks like you are riding a horse instead.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Crawford
United States
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
marvinchian wrote:
Does the wording on Trader ("would gain" and "instead") cause an interrupt in play and force Trader to be resolved first?
Absolutely. That's basically what the entire discussion is about. When you reveal Trader, you never actually gain the card that you would have gained. It triggers on "would gain" which is a moment in time before you ever gain anything. The card in question was never, at any point in time, gained.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Theorel Masheriel
United States
Georgia
flag msg tools
mbmb
Quote:
Does the wording on Trader ("would gain" and "instead") cause an interrupt in play and force Trader to be resolved first? In which case, I still prefer to look at "it is" vs "it". The whole "feed a blue dog" thing doesn't cover it for me. I think, "feed an animal and do something with the recently fed animal," is better. If it is a dog, walk it. If it is a horse, ride it. If it is a dragon, slay it. Whatever. If you intend to feed and walk a dog but drop the food and the horse eats it, well, looks like you are riding a horse instead.

This is right. But instead of the horse eating it, think of it as you dropped the food and nothing ate it. Then, completely separately from the feed an animal and do something, you go off and feed a horse.

This is what Trader does it says "Wait, don't gain the Great Hall." It could stop there, and say nothing else...at that point it doesn't matter what Trader tells you to do, because you didn't gain a card from Ironworks. It doesn't make sense for the "it" printed on Ironworks to refer to a card gained on Traders. Traders does not say "transform the Great Hall gain into a Silver gain." It says "Instead of gaining a Great Hall, gain a silver"...or written another way: "Don't gain a Great Hall. Gain a silver". The silver gain is totally independent of the original gain, except as a trigger.

(Note: it just so happens that the animal you fed was a legal target of the first feeding, but that doesn't matter...you could have dropped the food and had a bird eat it. Then what would you do?)


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mark barbieri
msg tools
mbmbmb
But something did eat it (and you did gain a card, a Silver). If a bird ate it, you would do what the rules say to do if a bird ate it, which is "nothing". Similarly, if you gain a Curse with Ironworks, you do nothing.

Ironworks is the action card in play. It tells you to gain a card and do something based on what type of card you gain. When it comes time to get the bonus, you check ...

Ironworks: "Did you gain a card?"
Player: "Yes."
Ironworks: "What type of card did you gain?"
Player: "I gained a Silver, which is a type of Treasure."
Ironworks: "Congratulations, you get +1 coin."

Why would Ironworks care about the Trader? It wants to know what the card you gained is. You took a card from the Supply and put it on your Discard pile. Since the exceptions to the source (Supply) and destination (Discard pile) do not apply for Ironworks, that is the definition of gaining a card. You were planning to gain an Action/Victory. In the end, the card you actually gain is a treasure.


There could be a Reaction card that gets played by an opponent. Something along the lines of:
"If another player would gain a Victory card without buying it, you may reveal this card. If you do, that player gains a Silver instead."
This would have the same result, namely, you gain a Silver and you get +1 coin.

Edit: Changed "gain" to "would gain" in the made-up Reaction text.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Thomas Brendel
United States
Atlanta
Georgia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
But Ironworks doesn't ask, "Did you gain a card?" It asks, "Did you gain a card because of me?" And if you say, "Well, no, but I did gain this Silver because of Trader," it says, "Aw, bummer, I was hoping you would gain a card because of me." Ironworks is needy! Ironworks demands validation.

Consider these cases. (For all of these, assume that enough Bridges or Highways have been played.)

You play Ironworks and gain a Border Village, which allows you to gain a Duchy. You get an action, but do you draw a card?

You play Ironworks and gain a Duchy, also gaining a Duchess. You draw a card, but do you get an action?

You play Ironworks and gain Cache, also gaining two Coppers. Do you get three coins to spend?

I hope you will agree that the answer in all cases is "no." And why not? Because Ironworks had nothing to do (directly) with gaining you those cards, so it's not going to give bonuses on them. The same is true of Trader. It's just true in a more confusing way.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Costello
msg tools
marvinchian wrote:

Ironworks: "Did you gain a card?"
Player: "Yes."
Ironworks: "What type of card did you gain?"
Player: "I gained a Silver, which is a type of Treasure."
Ironworks: "Congratulations, you get +1 coin."

Why would Ironworks care about the Trader? It wants to know what the card you gained is. You took a card from the Supply and put it on your Discard pile.

So, question for you. Lets say I've played two bridges. Now I play an ironworks and choose to gain a border village. I use border village's on gain effect to also gain a silver.

Now Ironworks asks: "What type of card did you gain?"

I think its pretty clear that you have to say "Action" referring to the border village, and not "Treasure" referring to the silver, and certainly not "Action" and "Treasure".

Same logic applies to the trader case. The silver you actually gained has NOTHING to do with Ironworks, so Ironworks doesn't give a bonus for it.

Also, it gets even weirder if you consider reaction cards that give you bonus cards in addition to whatever you would have gained anyway, or reaction cards that give you multiple cards instead of the card you were going to gain.

Edit: Got beat to the punch
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Costello
msg tools
Squidd wrote:
But Ironworks doesn't ask, "Did you gain a card?" It asks, "Did you gain a card because of me?"

Hehe, I still don't think its clear that Ironworks even asks that, but I've tried and failed to convince Donald otherwise, so that's the way it goes!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Whitney Barnes

California
msg tools
marvinchian wrote:
Sorry everyone.

I don't know if I missed it or if it is not here, so I have to ask ...

Why doesn't this situation trigger the rule about two things happening at once? It looks like two on-gain effects.


No, it's not. "Would gain" happens before "gain".

Quote:
I would have no problem with this: After I dropped a Great Hall into my discard pile and collected +1 Action and +1 Card, a Trader walked up and said, "You're just going to discard that perfectly good Great Hall? I'll give you a Silver for it."

No. Trader precludes the gain of the Great Hall. If I reveal an Estate with an Ambassador, and you Watchtower it away, you still gained it, for a bit. A Trade Route token would come off of the estate pile. If you Trader the Estate into a Silver, you never gained it. The token stays on.

The issue with Ironworks was that it wasn't clear if the Ironworks bonus should be based on whatever card you gained, or just whatever eligable card you picked, even if you don't end up gaining it, or if you forfeit it by not gaining the card you selected. Unless I missed something, Donald now seems to be going with the last; you forfeit your bonus.

Quote:
Does the wording on Trader ("would gain" and "instead") cause an interrupt in play and force Trader to be resolved first?

Yes. "Would gain" effects happen before "gain". And I guess after "buy " effects.

So I guess the upshot of Trader + Ironworks is that, if you were hoping to play Ironworks, pick an Action or Victory to get another action or draw, while really gaining a Silver, you can't do that. If you try, you get no bonus, so you might as well just Ironworks for the Silver, and get the bonus $1 for that. I suppose if the Silver pile were empty, and you really wanted to play the Ironworks without gaining anything, you could play it, pick an eligable pile, then Trader back that card for nothing in exchange, and get no bonus.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
mark barbieri
msg tools
mbmbmb
Squidd wrote:
But Ironworks doesn't ask, "Did you gain a card?" It asks, "Did you gain a card because of me?" And if you say, "Well, no, but I did gain this Silver because of Trader," it says, "Aw, bummer, I was hoping you would gain a card because of me." Ironworks is needy! Ironworks demands validation.

Consider these cases. (For all of these, assume that enough Bridges or Highways have been played.)

You play Ironworks and gain a Border Village, which allows you to gain a Duchy. You get an action, but do you draw a card?

You play Ironworks and gain a Duchy, also gaining a Duchess. You draw a card, but do you get an action?

You play Ironworks and gain Cache, also gaining two Coppers. Do you get three coins to spend?

I hope you will agree that the answer in all cases is "no." And why not? Because Ironworks had nothing to do (directly) with gaining you those cards, so it's not going to give bonuses on them. The same is true of Trader. It's just true in a more confusing way.

I don't agree with the "because of me" part.

I do agree that no additional gains result in extra bonuses from Ironworks, but not because of your reason. Take the Border Village example ...

You gain a Border Village. When it hits your discard pile, the gain is complete. That triggers two different effects:
1) The Ironworks effect for gaining a Border Village
and 2) The Border Village effect for gaining a Border Village.

You can do them in any order but there is no way for Duchy to trigger Ironworks a second time. Ironworks says "If it is a... " "It" refers to the card you gain (costing up to 4). Once you put the Border Village into your discard pile, "it" means that Border Village. Ironworks does not say to apply the bonus to all cards you gain while resolving Ironworks. Ironworks applies the bonus once, to the card that you gain between the time you play Ironworks and the time the gained card hits the discard pile.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kevin Costello
msg tools
marvinchian wrote:

I do agree that no additional gains result in extra bonuses from Ironworks, but not because of your reason. Take the Border Village example ...

You gain a Border Village. When it hits your discard pile, the gain is complete. That triggers two different effects:
1) The Ironworks effect for gaining a Border Village
and 2) The Border Village effect for gaining a Border Village.

This is wrong though. Nothing "triggers" the Ironworks effect. It doesn't happen "when" you finish gaining a card. It just happens as you follow the instructions line by line.

The Border Village bonus happens immediately after gain the Border Village. Then, once the Border Village bonus is resolved, you continue with Ironworks.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Waterman
United States
Commerce Township
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
This all makes sense, Mr. X, and I fully accept the ruling as the card gained by Ironworks in this situation doesn't actually get gained, so there is no further advantage from gaining the Silver replacement. However, it seems that Ironworks-Trader is a CHAIN here, and as such it seems like the cards should complement each other rather than thwart each other?

In other words, the player wouldn't be ABLE to receiver a silver from Trader UNLESS he were first receiving a card from Ironworks. Therefore, doesn't the fact that I'm gaining a Silver card only because of the "combo" mean that I should get +1 coin as a result? Why should the Trader reaction negate the Ironworks benefit?

If a player is forced to receive a Copper and a Curse from a Mountebank, and he plays a Watchtower to force the Curse to go away, he still gains a Copper unless he CHOOSES to reveal the Watchtower a second time, right?

Montebanc (no relation, but I love watching him work! heh-heh-heh)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Waterman
United States
Commerce Township
Michigan
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hockey Mask wrote:
Someone just tell me when Ironworks 2.0 comes out.

Perhaps in the Master's Expansion??? *grin*

Montebanc
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alex Howlett
msg tools
donaldx wrote:

Yeah, sorry to everyone who convinced themselves that what I was saying must be reasonable, then saw me switch.

Anyway we got through this together, that's the important thing.

No. The important thing is getting it right.

After I play Ironworks, I must choose a card in order to continue. This is the point at which "it" begins to refer to something. "It" refers to the chosen card.

The correct answer is A.

An elephant never forgets which card he chooses.

P.S. Can we burn the FAQs?
2 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nick Knutsen
Norway
Oslo
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
kevincos wrote:
marvinchian wrote:

I do agree that no additional gains result in extra bonuses from Ironworks, but not because of your reason. Take the Border Village example ...

You gain a Border Village. When it hits your discard pile, the gain is complete. That triggers two different effects:
1) The Ironworks effect for gaining a Border Village
and 2) The Border Village effect for gaining a Border Village.
This is wrong though. Nothing "triggers" the Ironworks effect. It doesn't happen "when" you finish gaining a card. It just happens as you follow the instructions line by line.

The Border Village bonus happens immediately after gain the Border Village. Then, once the Border Village bonus is resolved, you continue with Ironworks.
Yes, but gaining a Border Village with Ironworks is still not a good comparison for showing that Ironworks doesn't give a bonus for the Trader'ed Silver.

The very gaining of the Border Village is what triggers Border Village's when-gain effect. So Iron Works makes you gain Border Village, then Border Village makes you gain a card costing less, then you continue with Iron Works. The card referred to ("it", i.e. "the card you just gained because of Iron Works") is clearly the Border Village.

Let's say you choose to gain a Great Hall with Iron Works. The gaining of a the Great Hall is not what triggers Trader's when-would-gain effect. Trader interrupts the gain before it happens.

So, marvinchian would be correct if the meaning of Trader was:

When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of gaining [that card], gain [a Silver], so that [a Silver] replaces [that card].

In this case, the very card Ironworks made you gain has been replaced before you get to the part where you check what type of card it was. The Silver is now "the card you just gained because of Iron Works" as far as Iron Works is concerned. The gain still happened, the Great Hall was just replaced with a Silver. Iron Works doesn't go back to the previous instruction to check that the card you tried to gain (on the "would gain" timing event) is the very card you ended up gaining.

But, as Donald has explained, that is not the meaning of Trader. Rather it is:

When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead of [gaining that card], [gain a Silver], so that [gaining a Silver] replaces [gaining that card].


[Gain a Silver] could just as easily have been for instance [discard a card]. It just happens to also involve gaining, just like the thing it replaces.

So the gain referred to on Iron Works did not happen. Something else happened instead, but Iron Works only cares about the gaining of that card. This is the explanation for why Iron Works doesn't give a bonus for that Silver.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Simantov
United States
New York
New York
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Suncho wrote:
After I play Ironworks, I must choose a card in order to continue. This is the point at which "it" begins to refer to something. "It" refers to the chosen card.
But Ironworks doesn't say "Choose a card costing up to $4 and gain it." Or "Choose and gain a card costing up to $4." It says "Gain a card costing up to $4." And then the rest of Ironworks asks whether "it" was an Action, Victory, or Treasure.

The word "it" in the second sentence cannot refer to the card you chose, because in that first sentence, there is no such thing as a card you chose. Well sure you chose a card in order to gain it, but Ironworks doesn't know about the card you chose, any more than it knows about the card you thought about, the card you considered before the one you chose, the card your friend told you to get, the card you lifted up to re-read the text of to see if it's the one you really wanted, etc. Sure those things maybe happened before you gained the card. But Ironworks only knows about the card you gained.

Ironworks doesn't even have the word "choose" in it, how could it possibly be referring to what you choose? It makes no sense. You're inventing additional words that the card doesn't have. It must be the card you gained. That's what "it" must refer to. But you didn't gain one from Ironworks' first sentence, because of your Trader. Or your Possession. Something else happened instead. So you get bupkis.

Believe me, I was hoping the answer was A too, but if you just think about it, it has to be C.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drew Spencer
United States
Tucson
Arizona
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If I reference Hitler or the Nazis will this thread end?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
The Compulsive Completist
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
banyan wrote:
If I reference Hitler or the Nazis will this thread end?
I got something better.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
[1]  Prev «  3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7  Next »  [9] |