Possible bug with joker combination?

[fraggerman]

I have a combination of Canio (gain x1 mult when a face card is destroyed), Pareidolia (All cards are considered face cards) and Ceremonial Dagger (destroy joker on the right when blind is selected).

The dagger ate another joker and Canio did not gain a x1 mult. From what I can see jokers should be considered cards and from the wording on the cards this combination should work.

So is this a bug or are jokers not considered cards?

[Chifasu]

Pareidolia only affects your deck cards, not your jokers.

[Goblin]

The distinction is more in what can be face cards and what cannot.

You're right that this is confusing, since for instance Campfire does require you to sell jokers or consumables to scale, but still refers to those as just "cards", and Swashbuckler says "left of this card" when referring to itself. Pareidolia should probably say "all cards in deck" instead.

[Ronald Brain]

Face Card means the PLAYING CARD in your hands that are Face Cards: KQJ. Therefore Ceremonial Dagger eating a Joker (or Madness consuming a Joker) has no effect.

[fraggerman]

Originally posted by Ronald Brain:

Face Card means the PLAYING CARD in your hands that are Face Cards: KQJ. Therefore Ceremonial Dagger eating a Joker (or Madness consuming a Joker) has no effect.

What it means and what it says on the card are two different things. If this is correct the wording on the card is wrong.

Pareidolia says ALL cards are face cards, so jokers should be considered face cards.

[Amplify]

Originally posted by fraggerman:

Originally posted by Ronald Brain:

Face Card means the PLAYING CARD in your hands that are Face Cards: KQJ. Therefore Ceremonial Dagger eating a Joker (or Madness consuming a Joker) has no effect.

What it means and what it says on the card are two different things. If this is correct the wording on the card is wrong.

Pareidolia says ALL cards are face cards, so jokers should be considered face cards.

Jokers aren't cards. They are not referred to as card anywhere. You just assumed that they were, incorrectly, then blamed the wording when there's no wording anywhere backing you up calling jokers "cards".

[fraggerman]

Originally posted by Amplify:

Originally posted by fraggerman:

What it means and what it says on the card are two different things. If this is correct the wording on the card is wrong.

Pareidolia says ALL cards are face cards, so jokers should be considered face cards.

Jokers aren't cards. They are not referred to as card anywhere. You just assumed that they were, incorrectly, then blamed the wording when there's no wording anywhere backing you up calling jokers "cards".

They are not? I dare you to read the description of Abstract Joker then. It clearly says "+3 Mult for each joker CARD"

[Amplify]

Originally posted by fraggerman:

Originally posted by Amplify:

Jokers aren't cards. They are not referred to as card anywhere. You just assumed that they were, incorrectly, then blamed the wording when there's no wording anywhere backing you up calling jokers "cards".

They are not? I dare you to read the description of Abstract Joker then. It clearly says "+3 Mult for each joker CARD"

Then that joker specifically could use a rewording for the absolute ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ who see "all cards are face cards" and assume that for some stupid reason must apply to jokers too. Child proof everything, whatever.

[Goblin]

Originally posted by fraggerman:

Originally posted by Amplify:

Jokers aren't cards. They are not referred to as card anywhere. You just assumed that they were, incorrectly, then blamed the wording when there's no wording anywhere backing you up calling jokers "cards".

They are not? I dare you to read the description of Abstract Joker then. It clearly says "+3 Mult for each joker CARD"

And as I already mentioned, Campfire says "for each card sold" while referring to both jokers and consumables. But Amplify can't handle things that don't agree with his worldview.

[taggedjc]

"Card" is used to refer to Jokers in many, many places.

The issue here is the wording on Pareidolia, which should instead say that standard playing cards count as face cards, just like how the regular boosters refer to them as standard playing cards.

[Ronald Brain]

Originally posted by taggedjc:

"Card" is used to refer to Jokers in many, many places.

The issue here is the wording on Pareidolia, which should instead say that standard playing cards count as face cards, just like how the regular boosters refer to them as standard playing cards.

This is something gamers usually figure out on their own, but I suppose we all need tutorial nowadays. Nevertheless, LocalDev is a one-person publisher, I'll give him a break on these loose "term".

[fraggerman]

Originally posted by Ronald Brain:

Originally posted by taggedjc:

"Card" is used to refer to Jokers in many, many places.

The issue here is the wording on Pareidolia, which should instead say that standard playing cards count as face cards, just like how the regular boosters refer to them as standard playing cards.

This is something gamers usually figure out on their own, but I suppose we all need tutorial nowadays. Nevertheless, LocalDev is a one-person publisher, I'll give him a break on these loose "term".

The problem here is that in rouguelikes and deck builders wording is very important. Usually in games of this genre the interaction should work as described. It not working is either a bug or the wording for Pareidolia needs to be changed.

As a "gamer" it is interesting that you can just ignore that this is an industry standard.

[Polyurethane]

There's always one guy in the room that takes things too literally and has to go on a warpath instead of just admitting they did something dumb and moving on with their life.

[Ronald Brain]

Originally posted by fraggerman:

The problem here is that in rouguelikes and deck builders wording is very important. Usually in games of this genre the interaction should work as described. It not working is either a bug or the wording for Pareidolia needs to be changed.

As a "gamer" it is interesting that you can just ignore that this is an industry standard.

I've been playing games blind since childhood, either not knowing English at all or the game just don't have full tutorial for "everything", so I guess this is just personal experience. If I see Jokers making all cards "Face Cards", and I know for a fact that the playing card in my deck have Face Cards and Numbered Cards, I wouldn't be assuming "cards" are Joker because, well, what do you want "Face Jokers" for, +4 Mult when Smiley Face is present? Campfire is dumb, yes, but a round of testing would tell me it gets buff per anything sold, so I wouldn't care if I can't sell "playing card".

Like I said earlier, this is a visual issue at best and nothing's broken, so I was willing to give LocalThunk a break. It'd be nice to have a fix, yes, but I wouldn't raise a sting about it just because I read it wrong and lose a run.

[taggedjc]

Originally posted by Ronald Brain:

If I see Jokers making all cards "Face Cards", and I know for a fact that the playing card in my deck have Face Cards and Numbered Cards, I wouldn't be assuming "cards" are Joker because, well, what do you want "Face Jokers" for, +4 Mult when Smiley Face is present? Campfire is dumb, yes, but a round of testing would tell me it gets buff per anything sold, so I wouldn't care if I can't sell "playing card".

Like I said earlier, this is a visual issue at best and nothing's broken, so I was willing to give LocalThunk a break. It'd be nice to have a fix, yes, but I wouldn't raise a sting about it just because I read it wrong and lose a run.

Smiley Face, as currently worded, would do nothing for a Face Card Joker, as it says "Played face cards give +4 Mult when scored" (emphasis mine) and a Face Card Joker would neither played nor scored.

It's definitely not working as written, so even if it wasn't intended, something needs to be changed if it's going to be consistent. This is a perfectly acceptable reason to "raise a stink" about it, since it's very likely something LocalThunk didn't notice (which is reasonable, since it's a pretty niche case).

While it's true that once you see how it works you can work after that with the correct assumption, it still feels pretty bad to make choices based on the way something is explicitly stated to work, and then find out that it doesn't actually work as stated. It's not the end of the world and nobody is trying to claim it's any worse than it is. It's just a discrepancy that should be addressed somehow, either by changing Pareidolia to explicitly only affect cards in your deck, or to allow Canio to count destroyed Face Card Jokers and Face Card Consumables.

In fact, making this thread is a good way to give some options to LocalThunk since then he might choose to make Canio work with Jokers and Consumables that happen to be Face Cards thanks to Pareidolia, making it an interesting and sneaky interaction that many people wouldn't notice at first glance.