The Fortune Tellers and other expansions

[corinthiens13]

With the same settings, I'm not getting the same results. It seems you are getting the latest HTML (I can tell for the missing "have"  ) but some old Javascript is being cached. For example, I'm not getting the actions for placing the tile in front of you or performing messages (#1B) step three times. I tested it on my mobile.

Can you check if it is your browser cache getting in the way?

I'll check your other comments later. Thanks for your help! 

I used my mobile phone, that may have been the reason. Previous post updated now that I can see the page without those cache problems 

[Vital Pluymers]

This is only stating that if you have drawn more than 1 tile because of your Fortune Teller(s), you are not allowed to draw additional tiles in your builder's turn.

Correct.

All the rest is free interpretation and cannot be concluded from the way the rules are written.
It is not clear whether he must use one of the remaining drawn tiles or if he can choose to place one of the special tiles in his supply.

My point is that the rules focus on not drawing new tiles for the second part of a double turn. They don't say a thing about being that the only possibility at that point, that is, the rules do not mention anything about placing an abbey tile instead. So placing an abbey tile instead and discarding the remaining tiles you drew is a valid option to using one of the tiles you have in your hand already?

The nuance here is: The rules just say you don't draw new tiles for the second part of your double turn. They don't say you cannot place a tile in your supply as an alternative to use a drawn tile. The latter would be a valid option in any other case. Can we apply this general rule in this case?

It's true that you can place a tile from your supply in your builder's turn when there are no Fortune Tellers involved. And it's also true that it is not explicitly forbidden when they are. So, I think we can indeed apply the general rule in this case.

[Vital Pluymers]

Why should it be possible to choose a tile that cannot be placed if there are one or two tiles within the group of drawn tiles that can be placed?
In a normal turn without a Fortune Teller, you would have to place any tile that can be placed. Sometimes you have bad luck and yo have to place it on a location you don't like too much.

If you possess one or two Fortune Tellers, you already get a big advantage because you are allowed to draw more tiles. Isn't that enough as a benefit for the Fortune Teller. To allow the player to select a tile that is not placeable, possibly receiving the benefits from it (WoF, Peasant Revolts, ...) and then grant him another replacement tile seems to be too much...
Also with one or two Fortune Tellers, the player should cope with the tiles he has drawn. I would say that he must place one of the drawn tiles that can be placed instead of allowing him to choose a non placeable tile.

And please don't say a player does not know if the tile is placeable or not at the moment he selects it. He knows 

[Meepledrone]

I agree that The Fortune Teller can become very powerful if it allows you to bend the rules and discard tiles whiel getting benefits from them.

So the question currently on the table are:

1.a) When you have extra tiles from fortune tellers, should the player choose a placeable tile only?
1.b) If so, only if there is no valid placement for any of tiles drawn, you are allowed to discard them all and draw up to three tiles again, right?

The issue regarding discarding a tile due to bridges still stands.

Additionally, there is another question that came to me last night:

2) If a double turn is granted, should you keep all the extra tiles until part 2 of your turn and then decide or just keep the one you want to place?

So far I considered the former, since bazaar rounds or messages during the first part of your turn may render an initially placeable tile into an invalid one. So I prefer to keep the options open until the last minute.

[corinthiens13]

I agree that The Fortune Teller can become very powerful if it allows you to bend the rules and discard tiles whiel getting benefits from them.

So the question currently on the table are:

1.a) When you have extra tiles from fortune tellers, should the player choose a placeable tile only?

I'd say no to be consistent with the order of play for when only one tile is drawed. Because if so, you do not have the possibility to perform WoF or revolt action of unplacable tile, but normally you should:
1. Draw a tile
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place it or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new one and go back to step 2

I think we have to keep those steps with the fortune teller :
1. Draw 2-3 tiles and chose one to play
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place the tile or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new tile and go back to step 2 (you do not get the chance to play the previously drawed tiles as you did already chose not to play them)

And so the fortune teller only allows you to chose between 3 tiles when you first draw them ! And there's no issue with bridges.

Additionally, there is another question that came to me last night:

Are you sleeping sometimes?

2) If a double turn is granted, should you keep all the extra tiles until part 2 of your turn and then decide or just keep the one you want to place?

So far I considered the former, since bazaar rounds or messages during the first part of your turn may render an initially placeable tile into an invalid one. So I prefer to keep the options open until the last minute.

I agree with this point of view. You keep them aside until you stard a double turn, and then choses one to play and
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place the tile or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new tile and go back to step 2 (you do not get the chance to play the previously drawed tiles as you did already chose not to play them)

[Vital Pluymers]

I agree that The Fortune Teller can become very powerful if it allows you to bend the rules and discard tiles whiel getting benefits from them.

So the question currently on the table are:

1.a) When you have extra tiles from fortune tellers, should the player choose a placeable tile only?

I'd say no to be consistent with the order of play for when only one tile is drawed. Because if so, you do not have the possibility to perform WoF or revolt action of unplaceable tile, but normally you should:
1. Draw a tile
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place it or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new one and go back to step 2

I think we have to keep those steps with the fortune teller :
1. Draw 2-3 tiles and chose one to play
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place the tile or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new tile and go back to step 2 (you do not get the chance to play the previously drawed tiles as you did already chose not to play them)

And so the fortune teller only allows you to chose between 3 tiles when you first draw them ! And there's no issue with bridges.

I would say "Yes" to Meepledrone's question.

In a normal turn you don't have to choose between tiles, so there is no need to check upfront whether a tile can be placed or not. You must perform the WoF or Revolt action because this is the tile you have "chosen by drawing a tile".

But while playing with The Fortune Teller, a new element comes into the game, namely you have the ability to choose between the drawn tiles. I still would suggest that you cannot choose an unplaceable tile just to be awarded for the benefits of a tile that you are not planning to place. If you look at this more closely, you are just creating two (or in some cases even three) "hidden turns" in one turn. I don't think that is right.

2) If a double turn is granted, should you keep all the extra tiles until part 2 of your turn and then decide or just keep the one you want to place?

So far I considered the former, since bazaar rounds or messages during the first part of your turn may render an initially placeable tile into an invalid one. So I prefer to keep the options open until the last minute.

I agree with this point of view. You keep them aside until you stard a double turn, and then choses one to play and
2. Perform WoF or revolt
3. Place the tile or, if not possible, place it with a bridge or discard it.
4. Draw a new tile and go back to step 2 (you do not get the chance to play the previously drawed tiles as you did already chose not to play them)

I agree.

[corinthiens13]

If you look at this more closely, you are just creating two (or in some cases even three) "hidden turns" in one turn. I don't think that is right.

Yes, exactly the same way as when discarding an unplacable tile and drawing a new one when there's no fortune teller   

I see it like if choosing a tile is like drawing one, except you draw one of the three on top of the dispenser (or bag, or pile). Nothing else changes. 

[Vital Pluymers]

If you look at this more closely, you are just creating two (or in some cases even three) "hidden turns" in one turn. I don't think that is right.

Yes, exactly the same way as when discarding an unplacable tile and drawing a new one when there's no fortune teller   

I see it like if choosing a tile is like drawing one, except you draw one of the three on top of the dispenser (or bag, or pile). Nothing else changes. 

It's not the same. If you draw one tile, you have no choice.
With Fortune Tellers, you get an important advantage over other players. You can choose the best tile out of two or three. Choosing is not like drawing, choosing is an active activity, drawing is passive. You have already two or three tiles to choose from, that 's strong enough as a benefit.

Anyhow, it's just a matter of how you feel about it. The answer cannot be found in the rules. It's not written anywhere that you can choose a non placeable tile, nor that you can't.

[Meepledrone]

As you mention, there is no rule about forcing you to choose or not unplaceable tiles.

In any case, I would try to make it more difficult for players to chain tiles in the same draw by discarding all the tiles in the draw if you cannot place the tile you chose. If you could exploit the chaining of discarded tiles until you start drawing one tile only to restock your tiles in hand.

The only case I see to redraw individual tiles if if you draw a dragon tile and the dragon figure is not still in play.

Anyhow, I don't know in your case, but the unplaceable tiles I usually draw are CCCC tiles most of the time, although once I drew an RRRR tile. This is in the last two years... 

Maybe this is much ado about nothing in the end.

What do you think?

[Vital Pluymers]

As you mention, there is no rule about forcing you to choose or not unplaceable tiles.

In any case, I would try to make it more difficult for players to chain tiles in the same draw by discarding all the tiles in the draw if you cannot place the tile you chose. If you could exploit the chaining of discarded tiles until you start drawing one tile only to restock your tiles in hand.

Like we said, there are no rules, so we can guess whatever we want to. My opinion isn't any better than the opinion of you or corintiens13.
Frankly, I think we can only list the possible options in WICA, but not choose one as the correct or favourite one.

As long as there is no official clarification or that someone could convince me otherwise, I will play it like I believe it is right. If you draw a tile you can place, you must place it..

Anyhow, I don't know in your case, but the unplaceable tiles I usually draw are CCCC tiles most of the time, although once I drew an RRRR tile. This is in the last two years... 

Maybe this is much ado about nothing in the end.

What do you think?

That's for sure 

I don't think it happened even once in the thirty last games I have played. And like you mention, the CCCC and RRRR tiles are mostly the problematic ones.
So, it's a lot of fuss about a rare thing. But still, we like clear rules 

[Bumsakalaka]

Well. Unplaced tile happends to me multiple times last year. It depends which expansions you plays, but it happend to me also with FFFF (with Monastary) on very beginning of game mabe 2nd or 3rd tile in game.

Well. There was written a lot, but I will play this. If player choose unplaceable tile, then tile is discarted and he is getting another tile from stack by standard rules.

Look to rules as simple as possible. We don't want from this game Scythe, right? ;-)

[Vital Pluymers]

Well. Unplaced tile happends to me multiple times last year. It depends which expansions you plays, but it happend to me also with FFFF (with Monastary) on very beginning of game mabe 2nd or 3rd tile in game.

Well. There was written a lot, but I will play this. If player choose unplaceable tile, then tile is discarted and he is getting another tile from stack by standard rules.

Look to rules as simple as possible. We don't want from this game Scythe, right? ;-)

Simple rules? Do you really want to say that Carcassonne is a simple game? 
If you look at the immense work that is gathered in the WICA, exploring all kinds of different cases and providing clarifications to rules that are or were not clear, Scythe would be degraded to just a game for small kids, don't you think?

[Bumsakalaka]

Scythe would be degraded to just a game for small kids, don't you think?

I will never looks to Carcassonne like before

PS: anyway complexity of zillion expansions needs to have rules as simple as possible


Odoslané z SM-A202F pomocou Tapatalku

[Meepledrone]

Sorry to point it out but we are trapped in a maze of rules... And HiG threw away the floor plan some time ago... 

[Meepledrone]

Updated version of the Order of Play with an explanation in the Introduction section about the options chosen for The Fortune Tellers... Reworked Step 1B and 1C accordingly and reduced the previous verbosity when choosing a tile at the beginning of Step 1B. 

https://wikicarpedia.com/index.php/Order_of_Play

Your comments are welcome.