Rule clarification - Venom.

[Tisaac]

Since when are bugs fair?

It should be a draw though, if the game bugs out. Neither player deserves the loss.

Edit: Or better, the game result should be cancelled.

That's not really a bug though, it's more complicated than that. The adaptation is not supposed to check all possible outcomes so see whether it should be blocking you or not, that's just an impossible task for a complex game like arknova (and it can actually have a bad side effect of giving player some help by letting him play something hé didnt realize he could actually do because it involve complex interactions).
And it's the same around the table, but probably in such a case you will just find an home made rule to unstuck the situation, like letting the person undo and shuffle the desc or something like that. But what if someone would do that during an IRL competition ? Let's say it took a move that only had 5% of failure but he ended up stuck ? Wouldnt you just declare him as a loser ?

[Jellby]

One thing is a blocked table because of a programming bug. In that case neutralizing/abandoning the game is fair.

Another thing is a blocked table because there are no possible actions or it's not possible to complete an action. It could be argued it's a "bug" in the game rules, but it can also be argued that it's your responsibility as a player to make sure you can complete your actions and there's something you can do after. The only problem I see is in multiplayer (>2) game. Should the offending player just be eliminated and the game proceed without them?

[pjt33]

The problem with venom is that it can leads to blocked tables, so the adaptation is trying as much as possible to avoid that, by sometimes being too restrictive rather that not enough

That specific proposal is independent of the venom code. As I recall, venom didn't block me from drawing cards from reputation range, because that's an undoable action. The problem was that the Map 4 ability could only be activated before drawing any cards or after drawing all the cards.

[Tisaac]

The problem with venom is that it can leads to blocked tables, so the adaptation is trying as much as possible to avoid that, by sometimes being too restrictive rather that not enough

That specific proposal is independent of the venom code. As I recall, venom didn't block me from drawing cards from reputation range, because that's an undoable action. The problem was that the Map 4 ability could only be activated before drawing any cards or after drawing all the cards.

There are two different issues here :
- the timing of map 4 that is indeed an issue because the game currently autopass sometimes eventhough using map4 could make the action available. It's not easy to solve because you dont want to pause the game at every step to check whether the player would want to use map4 or not. Having too many confirmation is very bad UX, we had a similar issue on Agricola with players complaining.
- the fact that Venom check when not enough money for undoable action like drawing cards is not taking into account map4.

[Arrigo II]

A bit OT, but personally I find the rulebook itself not to be crystal clear about the venom issue. I think it would be easier if there was some other (heavy) penalty in case you are not able to pay at the end of your turn, instead of the "restart your turn" thing. Maybe lose 5 attraction or something like that. Then you could even gamble with Hunter on Map 4, and if you are unlucky well, joke's on you.

[pills34]

It's been filed before. To slightly misquote Monty Python, you can argue until you're blue in the face but you won't convince the programmer behind the BGA implementation to fix the bug. I wasn't even able to convince them to fix it so that you can use upgraded Cards to draw a visible card, sell that, pay the venom, and then keep drawing, despite the rules saying that you can use the Map 4 ability at any point in your turn.

It's not about convincing me that it's a bug or not, it's about difficulty to implement it. The problem with venom is that it can leads to blocked tables, so the adaptation is trying as much as possible to avoid that, by sometimes being too restrictive rather that not enough (eventhough there are still issue with Animals II at strength 5 that I havent be able to fix completely yet). So I am not sure how best to make it more permissive without introducing more blocking state, and it's not my top priority at the moment. If anyone wants to try to improve it, feels free to contact me and I will show you the codebase

Thanks for clarifying. I forgot to submit the "bug/issue" and returned to see replies. No need now - clearly it's known. I just wanted to know if the rule was right. Didn't affect my game. Pretty niche case IMO. I look forward to more games - great implementation.

[incoherentHarpy]

It's been filed before. To slightly misquote Monty Python, you can argue until you're blue in the face but you won't convince the programmer behind the BGA implementation to fix the bug. I wasn't even able to convince them to fix it so that you can use upgraded Cards to draw a visible card, sell that, pay the venom, and then keep drawing, despite the rules saying that you can use the Map 4 ability at any point in your turn.

It's not about convincing me that it's a bug or not, it's about difficulty to implement it. The problem with venom is that it can leads to blocked tables, so the adaptation is trying as much as possible to avoid that, by sometimes being too restrictive rather that not enough (eventhough there are still issue with Animals II at strength 5 that I havent be able to fix completely yet). So I am not sure how best to make it more permissive without introducing more blocking state, and it's not my top priority at the moment. If anyone wants to try to improve it, feels free to contact me and I will show you the codebase

Thinking narrowly so anyone feel free to blast me on other board locking situations…(is animals into sprint blocked the same way rn)
Is there any lineage of actions that after completing cards, you wouldn’t have something to sell? If there’s already a disclaimer that the turn can’t be undone you could add to it a selling warning and use the discard cards mechanic but change to “you must sell 1 card”

Spitballing. But as always appreciate the development!

[danielvictor]

The trouble with that is that clever players might find ways to engineer a blocked state when they were losing.