I have a green Joker acting as a 5. If I draw one of the two unseen 5s, can I then decide that the Joker is the one drawn so that I can immediately cash it in?
No. The Joker will assume the value of the green 5 that remains unaccounted for. It is only cashed when there are no outstanding tiles that it could possibly be.
I disagree. I do not see any such assertion in the rules. Unless I've missed something every time I've read them (which is possible), here are the facts (in David's context): ‣ The green Joker may be used as any green tile. ‣ He doesn't have to specify whether it's ☸ or ⚓, unless he's putting it in the foundation, which would force the suit to match. ‣ He can't use the green Joker to represent a tile up top or in the layout. ‣ He can use the green Joker to represent a tile in the discard. ‣ He can leave the green Joker undeclared until a later time in the game.
In my opinion, undeclared can only mean two things in this context: • He can leave it as the talon, to be buried as a discard, not only not having declared its suit, but not even having declared its rank. • He can play it to the layout without having declared its suit.
This brings us to "a later time in the game" — time for joker exchange. Again, the facts: When the tile that the joker represents is revealed from the tableau or stock, it must replace the joker.
Now, there are several problems with this section of the rules. Number one: The discards are not even mentioned here. When the substituted tile is "uncovered" from the discard and becomes the talon, must it replace the joker, or is it the player's choice? Debatable. Perhaps the rule should have said that the replacement must happen when the tile is revealed from the tableau or becomes the talon. Number two: Imprecise wording. So far in the rules, the tile has been "used as" another tile, its suit has been "specified", it has "represented" another tile, "used for" another tile, and even left "undeclared". In literature, this kind of variety is preferable. In instructions, it is misleading. I would assert that "used as", "used for", and "represented" all mean the same thing. Similarly, I would assert that being "declared" and being "specified" are supposed to be synonymous; however, this latter point is more debatable.
It would seem that the difference in our perspectives, though, hinges on yet another "new" word: chosen. I think we can agree that the sentence tells us that when a tile is revealed that matches what he had already specified/declared/chosen the Joker to be, it must be exchanged; however, I have never seen this as requiring that suit was specified before the reveal. It strikes me as an interpretation incongruent with the rest of JQK's other enhancements to the Klondike model: Other than the reduced control of having 50% more suits and colors, every change has been to give the player more choice and control. You have three jokers. You have point valuations of the different suits. You have the option of putting aces in the layout so you can move 200% more "bases" to blank columns (i.e. all face cards, rather than just kings). To suggest that by not arbitrarily specifying whether his green Joker is ☸ or ⚓ means that a 5⚓ revealed from the stock may have no option but to be buried in the discard, just because the 5☸ wasn't already visible seems ludicrous to me.
So, can you please help me understand how you reached that conclusion? Is it something specified in the original Indochine—2000 rules? …because…
I should add, while we're on the "That's how the iPad app does it" topic: How does it behave when the replacement makes the transition from being a discard to the talon? What does it do if that definitely is the replacement? At this stage, I'm assuming it does nothing if there is still doubt as to the Joker's identity. Thanks!