The Fortune Tellers and other expansions

[Meepledrone]

Hi all,

I'm working on updating the Order of Reference in WICA to include the PnP expansions and I came across the following issues with the Fortune Teller...

Trying to apply the Fortune Teller rules and to be consistent with the rest of the rules I would assume the following approach:


Handling normal turns

1) You only draw extra tiles if you have to actually have to draw a tile. At that point you are allowed to draw one or two extra tiles to choose one between them.

2) If you place a tile from your supply (purchased tile in a bazaar, an abbey, a German castle or a Halfling), you never draw extra tiles at that point (you never draw tiles in this case). (See Q0 below)

This would be consistent with the fact that these actions are incompatible with drawing a new tile:
- If you purchased a tile, it is mandatory to place it if possible (anything can happen by chance or intentionally).
- If you decide to place some other tile from your supply, you are not allowed to draw a tile either.


Handling double turns

3) If the tile you placed grants you a double turn, the following scenarios may happen depending on what you did:

3.1) In the first part of your double turn you drew a tile as usual and the extra tiles allowed by your fortune teller(s).
   - In this case, you may have at least one extra tile left. You will have to choose one of them, if more than one, and then place it.
   - On the other hand, you may decide to place a tile from your supply and discard the extra tiles left. This is an advantageous position for the player, but you cannot unlearn the extra tiles you had to draw. (See Q1 below)

3.2) In the first part of your double turn you placed a tile from your supply (purchased tile, German castle, Halfling) so you have no extra tiles in your possession. (Note an abbey cannot trigger a double turn.)
   - In this case, you will need to draw a tile and the extra tile(s) corresponding to your fortune tellers, in order to chose one and place it. (See Q2 below)
   - On the other hand, you may decide to place another tile from your supply (abbey, German castle or Halfling). So no tile is drawn again.


Open questions

Here I would consider the following open issues:

Q0: Should be allow to draw extra tiles when placing tiles from your supply?
[I would say no for the sake of consistency.]

Q1: If you drew extra tiles, would you be allowed to discard them all and place a tile from your supply instead?
[I see no other option unless it is agreed that once you draw one or more tiles, you should not allowed to place tiles from your supply]

Q2: If you have to draw a tile and the corresponding extra tiles in the second part of your turn, should you just draw the extra tiles so you have the same number of tiles as if you had drawn these tiles at the beginning of your turn?
[I'm pondering pros and cons here: drawing all the tile in the second part of your double turn would allow you to bend the restriction defined in the rules]

And I have this final one:

Q3: If any of the tiles drawn cannot be placed, what should you do about it?
a) It may be ignored, as there is at least one other tile to choose from
b) A new tile is drawn to replace it and the discarded one is reshuffled if possible (This option would be the usual one when drawing just one tile)
[I would apply answer b) when possible]

Have you come across these situations? Did you apply any other approach?

I would appreciate any thoughts on this matter.



Linkback: https://www.carcassonnecentral.com/community/index.php?topic=4926.0

[corinthiens13]

Hi,

I think your "handling" description's fine.

Q0:  I'd say no for the sake of consistency

Q1: I'd say no, for the sake of consistency too

Q2: I'd say if you have no tiles left when beginning a double turn: You draw the number of tiles corresponding to the number of fortune-tellers you have AT THAT MOMENT
And if you have one or two tiles left, you only draw the missing tiles to have the tiles corresponding to the number of fortune-tellers you have at that moment.

Q3: I have no idea 

[dirk2112]

We play this expansion quite a lot, but I am by no means an authority on the rules.

Q0 No.

Q1 No.

Q2 This has come up with the builder.  Say my wife has 2 meeple on fortune tellers.  She draws 3 tiles, chooses one, but doesn't discard them back to the bag until her turn is complete.  If she plays a tile that involves the builder, she can only use one of the other 2 tiles she drew earlier.   

Q3 This hasn't come up for us, but I would assume that if you drew 3 tiles and 1 of them couldn't be played, you could redraw that one tile, BUT whatever tile you exchanged it for has to be placed.  An example would be if you picked up a CCCC tile with no open cities on the board along with 2 other tiles.  In order to be able to exchange that tile, you would have to choose it.  When you make that choice, you forfeited the other 2 tiles.  So there is a gamble there.   

[Meepledrone]

Let's see some examples covering double turns: Let's assume you have active two fortune tellers and none of them is completed in the following cases.

Case 1: you have draw tiles at the beginning of your turn

Part 1. You draw three tiles (the normal one and two extra ones granted by your fortune tellers) at the beginning of your turn, you choose one, place it and you get a double turn.
Part 2. Now you decide you want to place your abbey in a whole (just created?). Two things may happen:
a) You are allowed to do this, so you discard the tiles left from your draw and place your abbey.
b) You are not allowed to do this. You have to place one of the tiles left from your draw, since you already saw them.

The rationale for both cases would be as follows:
a) You are allowed to place a tile in your supply, the same as in any second part of a double turn.
    - Pros: It is consistent with the rules for other cases
    - Cons: You have more information to make a decision since you know the tiles you would discard. 
b) You shouldn't be allowed to place your abbey (or any tile in your supply)
    - Pros: You are being consistent with the incompatibility of drawing tiles and placing tiles from your supply.
    - Cons: You are adding a special case.

What approach would you prefer or consider more fair?


Case 2: you have to draw tiles in the second part of your double turn

Part 1. You place an purchase tile at a bazaar (or a German castle or a Halfling) and you get a double turn.
Part 2. Now you have to draw several tiles for the second part of your turn, so you draw...
a) Two tiles (your two extra tiles only so to speak, since you have two fortune tellers and you should have used one at the beginning of your turn if you hadn't use a tile from your supply)
b) Three tiles (the normal one and two extra tiles, since you have two fortune tellers)

At the beginning of your turn, you would entitled to draw three to use one, since you have two active fortune tellers. If you are granted a double turn, you would choose a second tile from the two tiles left from your draw.

Since you placed one tile from your supply, this sequence is altered. So the rationale for the previous options is as follows:
a) You should draw two tiles only since these would be the amount you would have in normal conditions
    - Pros: You keep the tile count consistent with the expected one in the rules
    - Cons: You are adding a new restriction not included in the known rules.
b) You should draw three tiles since you would do any time you draw, no matter the context.
    - Pros: You follow the mechanic no matter what
    - Cons: You are getting more tile options than the usual rules for a second part of a double turn.

What approach would you prefer or consider more fair?


Case 3: Discarding tiles

You draw three tiles (the normal one and two extra ones granted by your fortune tellers) at the beginning of your turn but one of them cannot be placed, so...
a) You discard it and draw a new one, and only then you choose one and place it.
b) You ignore the issue, so you choose one and place it and hope for the best. You discard and redraw tiles if none of them can be placed.

The rationale for both cases would be as follows:
a) You discard a tile as soon as you cannot place it so you have all your options open.
    - Pros: You have more options to chose from in a normal turn.
    - Cons: In a double turn, one of your valid tiles may become invalid after your placement so this may not be the best thing to do up front.
b) You cannot make a decision this early because the placement of the chosen tile may change the scenario and, in a double turn context, the tile you couldn't place may become valid for the second
    - Pros: You adapt the options to your tiles and it is a simpler option.
    - Cons: You may be more limited initially in a normal turn.

Examples of case a):
E1. You draw 1x CCCC tile, 1x RRRR and 1x FFFC. You may not place the CCCC tile so you discard it and draw a new tile.
E2. You draw 1x CCCC tile, 1x FFFF and 1x FFFC. You may not place the FFFF tile without a bridge (you don't have or you don't want to use) so you discard it and draw a new tile.

Examples of case b):
E1. You draw 2x CCCC tile and 1x FFFC. You may not place the CCCC tiles temporarily but if you place the FFFC tile and get a double turn, you will place one of the CCCC tiles in the second part of your turn.
E2. You draw 3x CCCC tiles, and you cannot place none of them. So you would be forced to discard them all and draw again.
E3. You draw 2x CCCC tiles and 1x FFFF tile, and you cannot place the CCCC tiles and the FFFF tile requires a bridge you don't have (or you don't want to use). So you would be forced to discard them all and draw again.

Note: I see these valid/invalid placement fluctuations as another interesting element for the game. I compare them in my mind to those situations when your get a CCCC tile and and you have to place it to your disadvantage. You have to cope with whatever you draw. The Fortune Teller shouldn't make things any easier in some cases because you have potentially up to three tiles to choose from. 

What approach would you prefer or consider more fair?

EDIT: Added more examples and the note at the end.

[corinthiens13]

Case 1:
I'd prefer option a to be consistent with rules for other cases. But an option'd be that you keep the tiles instead of discarding them, so that in case of a triple turn (message + builder), you're still stuck with the same tiles and do not get the chance to draw new ones?

Case 2:
I'd say option b to follow the mechanic. Option a would be more complicated to understand and apply, option b seems more intuitive.

Case 3:
I think the option proposed by dirk2112 is more logical. Discarding a tiles comes after the WoF or peasant revolt action.
Without a fortune teller, if you draw a WoF or Peasant revolt tile that cannot be placed, you still perform the WoF or revolt action before discarding it.
With a fortune teller, if you draw a normal tile, a WoF tile and a revolt tile, you first chose a tile, then perfirm the WoF or revolt action only if you chosed the corresponding tile, and so I assume it's only then that, if the chosen tile can't be placed, you discard it, draw a new one, and play it (you can't play any of the two other tiles as you already chosed not to play them).
This seems more consistent with the order of play and game mechanics. That way you avoid both cons you mentioned 

[Meepledrone]

Case 1:
I'd prefer option a to be consistent with rules for other cases. But an option'd be that you keep the tiles instead of discarding them, so that in case of a triple turn (message + builder), you're still stuck with the same tiles and do not get the chance to draw new ones?

You should use the tiles for the same draw for the first and second part of a double turn, but additional nested turns provided by messages, bazaars rounds with a double turn or the Saint Nicholas Scoreboard would require an independent draw of 2/3 additional tiles. 

Case 2:
I'd say option b to follow the mechanic. Option a would be more complicated to understand and apply, option b seems more intuitive.

I agree. The simpler, the better. I wouldn't consider any special cases here after all.

Case 3:
I think the option proposed by dirk2112 is more logical. Discarding a tiles comes after the WoF or peasant revolt action.
Without a fortune teller, if you draw a WoF or Peasant revolt tile that cannot be placed, you still perform the WoF or revolt action before discarding it.
With a fortune teller, if you draw a normal tile, a WoF tile and a revolt tile, you first chose a tile, then perfirm the WoF or revolt action only if you chosed the corresponding tile, and so I assume it's only then that, if the chosen tile can't be placed, you discard it, draw a new one, and play it (you can't play any of the two other tiles as you already chosed not to play them).
This seems more consistent with the order of play and game mechanics. That way you avoid both cons you mentioned 

I was putting together a mockup for the turn sequence of Steps 1B and 1C and this is what actually happens. The Order of Play would instruct you to draw up to three tiles but you choose one and process the associated actions before analyzing if it can be placed or not. So all the considerations about discarding tiles happen much later, so to speak.

So a scenario like this could happen:

Step 1B
1. You decide you don't want to use any tile in your supply so you draw 3 tiles, the usual one plus 1 tile for each one of your fortune tellers: a WoF tile, a Peasant revolt tile and a hill tile.
2. You choose the WoF tile
3. You show the tile to all the players
4. You perform the actions associated to the WoF tile
5. You may score some points (and maybe some other players), robbers steal points and you optionally receive a message

Step 1C
6. You then see you cannot place the WoF tile so you discard it and go back to Step 1B

Step 1B
7. You have two tiles left from the multiple draw, so you pick the Peasant revolt tile
8. You show the tile to all the players
9. You perform the actions associated to the Peasant Revolt tile
10. You may score some points (and maybe some other players), robbers steal points and you optionally receive a message

Step 1C
11. You then see you cannot place the Peasant Revolts tile so you discard it and go back to Step 1B

Step 1B
12. You have one tile left from the multiple draw, so you have to use the hill tile left
13. You show the tile to the players
14. You draw a second tile to place under the tile but don't look at it.

Step 1C
15. You need a bridge to place a tile, but you decide not to do so. You discard the hill tile and the second tile you draw to place underneath and go back to Step 1B.

Step 1B
16. You have no tiles left so you have to draw again. You draw 3 tiles again (unless you suddenly decide to place your abbey, a German castle or a Halfling).
17. The loop goes on... until you place one tile

Lovely, right?

[corinthiens13]

Your scenario seems correct to me, but with one question:

When you have three tiles, choses one, then discard it because there's no legal placement:
Instead of using one of the two tiles left, I'd rather say you already chosed not to use them at that step, so you draw a new one and have to use that new tile in place of the one you discarded. The two others can't be played at that step and you do only keep them for a possible builder's double turn.

[Meepledrone]

It makes total sense...

If you discard the tiles not chosen after selecting one, you cannot take advantage of the tiles once you know them by forcing the vicious loop I described in the previous example.

As per the rules, you would only keep the tiles if you get a double turn. And if you then choose (or have to use) a tile you cannot place, you would discard the tiles (chosen and not chosen, if any) and draw again 1-3 tiles.

I totally agree... 

[Meepledrone]

If you discard your tiles every time you cannot place a tile, this would also allow you to change your mind and place a tile from your supply (abbey, German castle or Halfling).

The open issue in my mind is that a player should be allowed to place an tile from their supply in the second part of their turn, thr same as there was no fortune teller involved.

The rules read as follows:

If a player’s turn is extended via a builder, the player will NOT redraw for a new tile, but will instead use the second tile that was drawn at the beginning of his turn. If a player has multiple tiles due to having two Fortune Tellers, he must choose which tile to place for his double turn.

So they indicate that if you want to draw a tile for your second part of your turn, don't do it. Instead you choose one of the tiles left from your draw at the beginning of your turn, if more than one left, and use it normally.

Therefore, you are not required to use only the tiles you drew thanks to the fortune teller. You may decide not to redraw/reuse tile and proceed with one of the tiles in your supply.

Any thoughts?

[corinthiens13]

Therefore, you are not required to use only the tiles you drew thanks to the fortune teller. You may decide not to redraw/reuse tile and proceed with one of the tiles in your supply.

Any thoughts?

Sounds good to me 

[Vital Pluymers]

If you discard your tiles every time you cannot place a tile, this would also allow you to change your mind and place a tile from your supply (abbey, German castle or Halfling).

The open issue in my mind is that a player should be allowed to place an tile from their supply in the second part of their turn, thr same as there was no fortune teller involved.

The rules read as follows:

If a player’s turn is extended via a builder, the player will NOT redraw for a new tile, but will instead use the second tile that was drawn at the beginning of his turn. If a player has multiple tiles due to having two Fortune Tellers, he must choose which tile to place for his double turn.

So they indicate that if you want to draw a tile for your second part of your turn, don't do it. Instead you choose one of the tiles left from your draw at the beginning of your turn, if more than one left, and use it normally.

Therefore, you are not required to use only the tiles you drew thanks to the fortune teller. You may decide not to redraw/reuse tile and proceed with one of the tiles in your supply.

Any thoughts?

I don't understand how exactly you came to that conclusion.

If a player’s turn is extended via a builder, the player will NOT redraw for a new tile, but will instead use the second tile that was drawn at the beginning of his turn. If a player has multiple tiles due to having two Fortune Tellers, he must choose which tile to place for his double turn.

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.
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.

[Meepledrone]

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?

[Meepledrone]

First version of the Order of Play including The Fortune Teller, Easter in Carcassonne and The Peasant Revolts...

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

All your comments are welcome 

[corinthiens13]

Hi,

Great work!

I selected T&B, P&D, WoF, halflings, messages, peasant revolts and fortune teller.

1ba: Missing the word "have" ("If you "have" one or more...")

1bb: Possible even if 1ba is true (you still had tiles granted by your fortune teller)? Maybe add in step 1ba "or perform step 1bb"

1ca: I think we ended with the conclusion that we discard only the tile we chosed and draw a new one we have to play instead? Without having the possibility to draw 2-3 tiles again, or to use side tiles (halflings, abbey...)?

1cb:" and you want to use one of those tiles." this tends to think "i don't like them, so I discard them to draw new ones with my builder". Si I'd remove that last condition, and add in step 1ba "or discard them and perform step 1bb"

That's all 

[Meepledrone]

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!