A weird play - Voluntarily taking a wound during buy

Discussion in 'Puzzle-Strike: Bag of Chips' started by ApolloAndy, Aug 19, 2010.

  1. ApolloAndy

    ApolloAndy Well-Known Member

    Last night I was playing Jaina and went first, and had 3 [1]'s, UP, and Crash in my first draw, BV and PWF and 3 [1]'s in my second. So on my first turn I crashed and bought a combine, checked my bag and realized that I had nothing useful to do second turn except BV. But I didn't have any wounds to BV on my second turn...so I bought one for free, put it in my discard and happily BV'd it second turn. (I realize I could have UP'd but I didn't think of it at the time).

    This got me thinking about the rule that you can't voluntarily take more than 1 wound per buy phase. This is a super duper fringe case, but I could see some scenario in which you'd want more than 1 wound from the bank (say you pigged BV and your deck was about to reshuffle and you really wanted to play BV next turn). I guess just tough on you?
  2. Stew

    Stew Member

    IMO, if you find a use for buying wounds, limiting that ability does nothing but hurt the scene. I mean, its not like an unbeatable strategy, just a cool (and I mean REALLY cool) interaction.

    Buying a chip that does absolutely nothing but be named "Wound" is worth buying in multiples? does nothing but increase the variance in the game.
  3. ChumpChange

    ChumpChange Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Yeah, I've done this before.
  4. mcw00ty

    mcw00ty Member

    I thought this rule already existed?
  5. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    The rule that you can't buy more than one wound is there, and it stands. It's not there for the reason you guys said. It's there because if it wasn't you could buy the entire stack of 24 wounds instantly so that argagarg and jaina can't even play. You could lose on purpose to grief them and that's dumb and shouldn't be allowed.

    The existence of some strategy where a person might legitimately want to buy 2 wounds doesn't change that. There also exist other situations where you'd legitimately want to do some illegal play, but tough luck, you have to develop strategies consisting of legal moves instead.
  6. XDarkAngelX

    XDarkAngelX Member

    Question: Is that allowed?

    What is open information? I know every discard pile is, and the bank (for obvious reasons) and I'm guessing almost 100% someone else's bag or hand isn't open info, but I didn't know your own bag was open info. Would every character chip also be open info?Obviously there's logistical issues since I can't request a player to show it to me if it's not in his discard, but could I show up at a tournament game with a print out of all the character chips?

    Last weekend I played Dominion for the first time and I got a slap on the wrist from the player who was teaching us how the game works because apparently even my own discard is not open information in that game. Which is just ludicrous IMO, but whatever.
  7. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    This question came up before. The first pass answer is that you can check your bag because that information is possible for you to know anyway. You could write down all your buys, count your discard pile, and deduce it, so why not save everyone the trouble and let them look through their own bag. This is a similar concept to making discard piles public in general, in that you could theoretically write down everything that goes in there, so it's better to save everyone the trouble and just let those zones be public.

    But then Chadmiller (and some others?) pointed out various problems with allowing checking your bag. I forget where it ended up, but I think Chad might have made a solid enough case to not allow it. I guess it's not really officially decided.
  8. sage

    sage Well-Known Member

    Yeah dominion top card of discard is public information. I think that rule is meant to speed up play or something. Anyway I hate that rule.

    You can look in your bag at any time, so long as you randomize it before drawing from it.
    edit: oh, it's not officially decided? Huh. Well I was telling people you can do it because a) it made sense to me, I mean you just shake the bag, and why not, and b) that's how it works in unity right now.

    If you want to know what the character chips actually do, that is public information. If you don't know, ask the other players, and if they don't remember, well you can either wait until someone draws it or check the website if it's immediately important. Chances are someone will remember, and while it's a tell for things like Reversal and Stone Wall, well whatever, if someone doesn't know what all the chips do then it's basically a casual game.
  9. Sotek

    Sotek Well-Known Member

    Definitely a printout of chips would be legit.

    Discards are public.

    Bag "should" be public, but there's an argument that maybe for tournaments it shouldn't be, due to potential cheating.

    For a semi-casual game, I would definitely let someone look in the bag, I'd just ask them to set the rest of their chips well aside first.
  10. ChadMiller

    ChadMiller Well-Known Member

    Yeah the main argument against checking bag is that the downside of letting unscrupulous players dig through their bag any time they want for any or no reason outweighs the upside of making information that "should" be public, public

    In M:tG they don't make you keep revealed cards face-up on the table, but your opponent can write them all down to keep track. That seems to work just as well for this game.
  11. Maris

    Maris Member

    i have found out that public discard means that if i write down every buy you make i can do the following things

    you have only 2 crash gems. you played last turn crash money. i look at your discard and see 2 crashes. rather than waiting for anything i crash immeditly.

    i can deduce if you have any reaction chips in your hand

    i know if you will crash me this turn so i know if I should crash or use combos are hard.

    ect ect.
    its not just memorization help public discards reveal more information that just what you played. they also reveal what you didn't play. which can be just as helpful.
  12. Claytus

    Claytus Well-Known Member

    The rule exists in Dominion because, for example, if you have 3 cards left in your hand, at the end of your turn, you can discard them all as a single stack, and only the top card is visible to your opponents. This effectively means those two "hidden" cards were never revealed, and your opponent can no longer say exactly what cards are in your discard or deck at any given time, even if he's written down all your buys for the entire game.

    However, that's a seperate issue from saying that a player can't look at their own discard... I don't remember whether Dominion forbids that or not, it never came up when I played.
  13. sage

    sage Well-Known Member

    I can tell you with 100% certainty that the rule exists to speed up play. A player cannot look at his discard, save the top card, which is to prevent excessive cardcounting while playing line-of-action decks, because line-of-action decks take too long already.
  14. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    We've been over this exact thing before, and the idea of hidden discards to speed up play is not right. I mean maybe that is Dominion's reason, but it's a wrong concept (unless maybe if Claytus's rule is a real rule). I'm pretty sure you all know this already, but just to say it again...

    Consider which is faster:
    a) hidden discard, so you just play
    b) discard that you can look through, which takes time

    Choice a) is faster, right? No, that's the fallacy. Choice a) is not an actual choice at all, because it's replaced with:

    c) hidden discard, optimal play is now that you carefully record every single card that goes in there, taking more time than if the discards were public.

    I have never heard of claytus's dominion rule that allows some cards to go in discard while still being hidden. Is that actually legal?

    MTG ran into this same issue. When you reveal the opponent's hand, you used to not be able to write down what you saw. Why not? Because it's faster if you don't. Ah...but that's not true. If you can't write it down, you site there for a few minutes creating some mnemonic to make sure you have it exactly memorized. Writing it down is faster so you just get it over with.

    It's unfortunate that in MTG you write that stuff down, and that in puzzle strike maybe you should write stuff down. But...I don't see any other way. Making everyone memorize is an even worse solution.
  15. icewolf34

    icewolf34 Well-Known Member

    no timer 0/10
  16. ApolloAndy

    ApolloAndy Well-Known Member

    ^^ Why would that logic not also apply to checking your own bag? (And in some fairy world where it were actually possible, getting the union of the opponents hand and bag).
  17. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    AppolloAndy that question is asked and answered in this very thread (post#7). I will now repeat the answer from my previous post. It does imply that you should be allowed to check your own bag. Then Chadmiller made good arguments that other things outweigh that. Chad then posted that his main argument had to do with cheating, but I think he had even more issues, originally. Then I said because there are two competing forces here, it's not clear which answer is best.
  18. ChadMiller

    ChadMiller Well-Known Member

    Well, the two parts were this:

    -If we assume that all information people should know by writing stuff down is public, then you end up with a weird situation where if someone's bag is empty all opponents should be able to look at that player's hand any time they feel like. We all agreed this is obviously silly, so it turns out that we can and should hide this sort of information if it's logistically necessary

    -Keeping bags is logistically necessary because it's a big fat cheating enabler
  19. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    Ah right. That would imply you "should" be able to look at their hand, but this conflicts with basic decency of not touching people's chips in their hand. It feels totally wrong to make anyone reveal or hand over chips unless some explicit game action says to, not just because you feel like making them do it. So we've already committed to hiding at least one thing that "should" be public.

    Regarding the cheating issue, it still seems possible to allow looking through your bag if you set aside your chips first though. I mean you could cheat somehow with that rule, but you could also cheat by slipping extra chips into your bag when you are reaching to draw them.
  20. ChadMiller

    ChadMiller Well-Known Member

    my argument here is that "allow people to mess with their bags at predefined points" is a far cry from "allow people to mess with their bags at arbitrary times and therefore wait until the opponent is paying the least amount of attention"
  21. bbobjs

    bbobjs Well-Known Member

    So then shouldn't anyone be allowed to look at a player's bag during that player's buy/cleanup phase, before that player draws their new hand? I don't see what problems this would cause.
  22. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    Looking in other people's bags sounds bad from logistics/social standpoint. It's like invading their space, and being able to invoke it that often sounds just bad. Really only looking through your own bag at will should even be considered, I think.
  23. ChadMiller

    ChadMiller Well-Known Member

    Like, here is an example from poker. Once a professional Vegas dealer told me why he doesn't tend to arrange chips in pots except between betting rounds: pros expressed frustration when he did. This wasn't because it was any less efficient (it wasn't, he could multitask fine), it was because if he was lifting chips or even just made some kind of honest mistake, it would only be caught if at least one player had an eye on him literally every second of the game as opposed to just during the predefined times when he was supposed to be messing with stuff.
  24. Xom

    Xom Patreon Supporter

    It feels awkward is pretty much the only reason (and a good one, IMHO).

    It seems to me looking through your own bag anytime should be legal with the one exception of non-digital tournament-like situations, where I guess people can take copious notes instead (including opponent buys while they're at it).

    Perhaps it can be legal to ask to look through your bag, and every opponent must agree each time, which is not obligatory.

    A similar rule could apply to both casual and tournament games, that it's legal to reveal your bag, iff your hand and top-of-bag are empty, and every opponent must agree each time, which is not obligatory. Usually this rule would be invoked when you asked a willing opponent to do so.
  25. Karrius

    Karrius Well-Known Member

    Why not just, for tournaments, "During your turn, you may place your chips in a stack face-down in the middle of the table before you look through your bag, announcing - and getting acknowledgment of all players for doing so" ?
  26. ChadMiller

    ChadMiller Well-Known Member

    if it's not obligatory for the opponent to let you I predict tournament players will say no 100% of the time
  27. Xom

    Xom Patreon Supporter

    IMHO at Rules-Enforcement-Level-1-equivalent events, you don't want to allow bag-rummaging all willy-nilly, but many opponents will say Yes.
  28. sage

    sage Well-Known Member

    What about "you can look through your bag anytime it's your turn, provided you stack your hand facedown distinctly separate from the bag."
    This way people only have to watch you if it is in fact your turn. A tiny FAQ entry can say "yes, after you draw your hand at the end of turn, you can have one last look at the bag, if you've forgotten what's in there. but no more after that, as the next person will start their turn."
  29. Archon Shiva

    Archon Shiva Well-Known Member

    This is how I was taught to play, and reading the rulebooks for the first three sets, I've never noticed anything to contradict it. (I may or may not have actually read it spelled out - reading a rule you already know about does not leave a strong impression on memory, and noticing missing rules is even harder)

    It's also a rule I've occasionally found quite interesting in actual gameplay.
  30. sage

    sage Well-Known Member

    btw, yes, hidden discard was decided solely as a way to stop people searching their own discard all the time, and yes, when you discard from hand, only whichever card ends up on top of the discard will become public information.
  31. Valcien

    Valcien New Member

    Noob question, why is memory barrier so taboo?

    Couldn't you just have the rule that players reveal for a maximum of X seconds?

    I figured that memory is a skill which can be developed.
  32. sage

    sage Well-Known Member

    Memory is a skill, but Sirlin has chosen not to specifically test for it in this game.
    For example, we've also chosen not to specifically test for physical endurance in this game (although you may find it hard to play while tired), unlike Chess Boxing, which does test for physical endurance.
  33. Sirlin

    Sirlin Steward of the Realm Staff Member

    I think he was asking about Magic: the Gathering. The thing I mentioned before about how when opponent reveals their hand, there was a time when you couldn't write it down and you had to remember it all (and take your time doing it).

    The answer is two parts. First, they could have added a rule for that, but it's just very messy and problematic to add a tournament floor rule JUST for giving a time limit while looking at the opponent's revealed hand. I mean there are already rules about time in general, but this would be a specific case. What about looking through their discard, does that need a timing rule? There are probably all sorts of similar edge cases where you see some hidden thing that isn't their hand cards, does that need a rule too? A blanket rule of just letting you write stuff down seems cleaner.

    The second part is that even if the first part didn't matter at all, testing your ability to memorize their hand cards in a few seconds is a boring skill for a competitive game. Seems great that they chose to keep it more about strategy than about that.
  34. Bridger

    Bridger Member

    Well I think that many games are a lot more fun when the opponents hand/deck is unknown. There's a lot more interesting valuation happening rather than just "knowing" that he has no crash gems.

    Unfortunately, in card games like this you have to reveal your stuff as you play it, and therefore it is possible to know those things. Therefore, to avoid people writing down all information (and slowing play), discards and your own bag should be open info (discards to everyone, bag to just yourself).

    I also like the concept of only looking at your bag on your turn. The other advantage of PS is that the discard for chips should ideally be all spread out on the table, not in a stack. This allows everyone to easily glance and see what's there, rather than asking you to reveal your discard. It's easier to spread chips out on the table than it is a stack of cards.
  35. ConsoleCleric

    ConsoleCleric Member

    It's rude to look in other people's bags. Momma always told me that.

Share This Page