Talk:Blue dog rule
This article has several mistakes.
The description of the "Blue dog rule" is wrong. It's a ruling on what to do when an ability (not a card) has an effect based on a card it's gaining, but the card is never actually gained. The phrase "either on a card it's gaining" is wrong. Likewise the list of cards should not include cards that change the gaining destination of the gained card. The fact that Mine doesn't put the gained card in your hand when you Trader it for a Silver was never a question that was resolved by the "Blue dog" ruling. It was clear before that. The "blue dog" ruling was about whether "it" in an ability refers to (A) the card you chose to gain or (B) the card you actually gained. If you reveal Trader, A means "it" still refers to the card you chose, but B means "it" refers to nothing, because you didn't gain a card.
The fact that the Silver from Trader will not be put in your hand/deck from Mine/Bureaucrat etc was made clear by Donald (and also by the rulebook) way before the "blue dog" discussion, simply from the fact that Trader cancels the original gain and triggers a new gain instead. That was clear, but it was not enough to answer the question of what happens when you Ironworks a card and then reveal Trader. If cards like Mine had been in question by the "blue dog" discussion, then going by A, you would reveal Trader to gain a Silver to your discard pile, then put the Treasure you chose from Mine in your hand. You would effectively put a Treasure from supply in your hand without gaining it in addition to gaining a Silver from Trader. Of course, this was never in question; Mine was never ruled on by the "blue dog" ruling.
The only abilities that I've identifies that can invoke the "blue dog" rule are these: Ironworks, Messenger, Seaway, Horn of Plenty, Summon. Two of these are missing from the list. --18.104.22.168 11:30, 22 February 2016 (EST)
- Update: I was wrong in my first post about how Mine would work if we interpreted "it" differently. Actually there is no way to go by A on Mine, as "put it into your hand" is not a movement instruction, but merely means "as you are gaining it, put it into your hand instead of in your discard pile", referring to the previous gaining instruction. Mine could have said something like: "Trash a Treasure card from your hand. Gain to your hand a Treasure card costing up to $3 more", with the same meaning. So in the case of Mine, "it" must refer to the card you're actually gaining, as you are gaining it. There is no question of "it" meaning "the card you chose". So "blue dog" makes no difference. Note that the same is not true of Summon. Summon actually gains the card, then moves it (two separate movement instructions). Here "it" could in theory refer to the card you chose (without the "blue dog" ruling).
- I was also wrong about the phrase "either on a card it's gaining" in the article. It should be included, as it refers to Summon. (However not to Mine etc.) However, to be correct it should say: "The "blue dog rule" is a ruling by Donald X on what to do when an ability has an effect either on a card it gained, or based on a card it gained, but the card was never actually gained for one reason or another."
- And to repeat, the article should say "ability", not card. Events are not cards, and also it makes it easier to follow. --22.214.171.124 10:16, 25 February 2016 (EST)
Since nobody has said anything else, I assume there are no objections. I'll update the article. --126.96.36.199 10:13, 1 March 2016 (EST)
Does blue dog rule apply, if player was already getting silver, but chooses to react to gaining silver by revealing trader?