Messages

I just started a game (#2584279), and we had to end it very early because it was unplayable. To be percise, one had to refresh the browser after (or rather, before) every action, as it wouldn't update after an action was taken. A turn would be, at best: Play treasures, refresh, buy card, refresh, wait for the other player to refresh and then play his turn. Actions, of course, would make it much worse.

1) Notification (audible) when I need to act. Too often I find that my opponent is waiting for me.
2) Missing/Hidden information.
   - The cards in non identical piles (Knights, Ruins, Split piles including Castles). Looking for external information is a real problem.
   - Opponent's duration attacks.
   - Minor other issues, such as the card saved with Haven.
3) Undo when no new information revealed. It drives me crazy when an opponent will not allow undo of a misclick, more than rudeness or even slowplaying. Black listing will probably help there too, but I still would like to have that undo.

I experienced it with lots of schemes. I guess there is also the possible issue of Alchemists, Herbalist and Potion, which may force, or at least limit, the possible orders. However, in any case where ordering happens, the interface should clearly indicate the direction.

All cards appear in a column, and it seems that the cards pushed to the bottom will be drawn first, but this is not indicated anywhere. There should be some indication wether the stack is the order in which you return cards (return from the top, thus draw from the bottom) or the ordering of the stack you return (then you draw from the top)

It would also be nice to have drag and drop work for ordering this, but less important.

Indeed, you can only see one card of the prize pile (for me, consistently, Trusty Steed)

When a "split" pile appears in the game, it states clearly that it is split, but I couldn't find anyway to read the bottom card. Thus I have to search the internet for the bottom card and it's description, unlike any other unfamiliar card which I can simply read in-game. Castles will probably have a similar issue, where a user will be forced to look at the list of castles outside the game to know how the rest of the pile behaves.

For random non-uniform piles (ruins, knights), obviously the cards beneath the top should be hidden, but one might argue that a list of possible cards should be available.

But debt tokens appear only in Empires. If only debt tokens were gained by the possessor it would require no errata, simply a statement in the Empires rulebook.

In any case, this discussion has wondered way off. This are the rules, and while I'm disappointed of the way the change was made I do not object to the actual rules. There is no apparent bug in Possession + VP tokens, though the Possession + Inn bug still holds.

Taxman order of effect as written on card:
1) Trash a treasure.
2) Each other player discards (or reveals hand).
3) Gain a treasure.

Order I've seen in game:
1) Trash a treasure.
2) Gain a treasure.
3) Each other player discards (or reveals hand).

Indeed, the errata exists. The Issue I have with it is simple, it means that in order to know the rules for a game that consists only of cards from Prosperity and Alchemy, you need to read the Empires rulebook. It used to be the case that the only rules you needed were the general rules for Base and every expansion in the game, plus rules for the cards actually in the game. Now you can have a game where Empires cards are not allowed, and still you need its rulebook, and that's the problem with errata.

Also, this are not the actual rules (as established here). The possessing player would not get Pirate Ship tokens. This rule, as far as I know, doesn't appear in any rulebook, and here's a further problem with errata.

TR was changed in the second edition, sure, but there was no "Errata". That's my point exactly, and the reason I'm disappointed with this decision. Also, since clearly there are still different token rules for different tokens (PS tokens go to possessed player), I don't see why the change was needed at all. An update in a new version is not the same thing as an errata - errata changes the formal rules for existing sets, a new version changes the rules for itself.

There is no updated card text for possession as far as I know, so no reason to change card text online. Maybe after the new printing of Alchemy.

As a side note, I did say I will not argue against accepting this errata, meaning I accept that the rules should comply with it, but it should be clear that errata will never be a change to the card text, and so there should be a way to view the actual rules. Physical games come with rules sheets, but in this case the rules sheets themselves are not enough, as none of them contains the errata. A player must be able to find the rules of the game.

Well, I will not argue for ignoring this "errata" though I am quite disappointed. Since clearly there was a decision not to issue any changes (as evident from not adding "may" to Throne Room), i don't see why this errata was needed, instead of simply stating that debt tokens alone go to the possessing player (and possibly changing the future printings of alchemy, and then changing the online rules as well).

Also, in that case I will claim that the site lacks full explanations of the rules. If I can't rely on the rule sheets, even if I have the rule sheets for the boxes of all cards in play, then there must be some source for the rules online.

In a Possession game I noticed 2 bugs:

1) With Goons, when possessed player had Goons in play and buy cards, bought cards should be gained by possessing player and VP tokens by possessed player. Instead, both are gained by possessing player. Log contains text similar to "X gains vp tokens instead" (quoting from memory). I've seen someone says this is also the case with VP tokens from Bishop, so would guess it's the case with all VP tokens and not directly related to Goons.

2) With Inn, when possessing player gains Inn in a possession turn (specifically, when possessed player played University or when possessed player buys Inn), possessing player should have Inn's "on gain" effect activated, but doesn't. Nobody had the "on gain" effect.