Dominion Strategy Forum

Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: Co0kieL0rd on July 29, 2014, 06:42:42 pm

Title: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 29, 2014, 06:42:42 pm
11/7/2017

Greetings, fellow fan card enthusiasts!

Roots and Renewal has been in development for over three years now, and little remains of my first card creations today. Iím constantly coming up with fresh ideas that fit the setís core concepts. This is why itís still far from finished and any feedback and practical experiences are greatly appreciated. This thread is being updated regularly, with frequent adjustments to cards, so check back from time to time so you donít miss anything!

A huge thanks goes to Asper for countless fun and interesting test games and plenty of feedback. Also thanks to Fragasnap and LastFootnote for their help and everybody else who keeps coming back and leaves a comment every now and then.


Dominion fan expansion: Roots and Renewal


Roots and Renewal has the following themes:

The Prime token increases the cost of all cards from the pile it's placed on by $1 and annuls all previous, current and future cost reductions of those cards. As soon as the Prime token is removed from that pile, this effect is made void retroactively, meaning that all past and current cost reductions now apply to cards from that pile even if they are result of resolving cards that have been played when the Prime token was still there.
There is only one Prime token, shared by all players. When a player is by a card, event or landmark instructed to move the Prime token he may choose to move it to the pile itís currently on (hence leaving it there).

Kingdom cards

(https://i.imgur.com/8tIwkjJ.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/k4ag3dE.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/SpguFPd.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/0SPtTza.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/0FCiMN4.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/qX5yODK.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/zDT5bUs.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/mbsV1xG.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/uPfDzez.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/diTpDj4.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/QCo8KnI.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/9TalTxk.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/kXrmM3t.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/kwlYU9i.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/5qNAAHh.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/SAOVwWh.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/0WFHCKb.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/4TqBF8C.png)  (https://i.imgur.com/3KllCMn.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/Zz3vQKz.png)   (http://]https://i.imgur.com/HdKuprZ.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/qQVSpBQ.png)

Split pile

(https://i.imgur.com/oHdaCAd.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/KF7HXZP.png)

Extra cards

(https://i.imgur.com/keIw0OF.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/9Yy81H3.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/Ebj8HJE.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/jH1QTmD.png)    (https://i.imgur.com/IeKmXbw.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/YtOnuV7.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/VPiAHbJ.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/VUnnchO.png)
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: scott_pilgrim on July 29, 2014, 07:15:43 pm
Comments on a few of the cards:

Fraud - The reaction is political in 3+ player games (do I discard it now to hurt this player, or hang onto it and hope to hurt the next player?).  I do think it's kind of a cool reaction though.  In fact, I think if you just have it reveal itself instead of discarding, then it's non-political.  Actually, then it has another problem though; if two players disagree on what card they want another player to gain, I think they can go on indefinitely revealing their Frauds?  So I'm not sure there's a clean fix.

Cavalry - Aside from being insanely strong (even without the attack part, I think it would be a very strong $5), the discard attack is too brutal.  In general in Dominion, nothing can ever force a player to play on a two-card hand.  Torturer gives other players the option to discard past three cards, but they can always just choose to gain a Curse, so it's fine.  Cutpurse can if you manage to stack them and the opponent has mostly Copper, but by the time you can stack Cutpurses usually your opponent has enough non-Copper cards in his deck that a pin is not possible.  A bunch of Rabbles chained together can effectively gives someone a 2-card hand, but 1. that takes a lot of work and is hard to do consistently and 2. by the time such a Rabble chain can be pulled off consistently, the game is likely nearing an end anyway (either the player doing it has a very strong deck, or the player on the receiving end has a lot of green in their deck).  OTOH, Cavalry rewards you for trashing three cards (which is already a swingy mechanic) by forcing other players to discard down to two.  That pretty much stops them dead, and it does so early in the game (when you're more likely to have three cards you want to trash), so you accelerate way faster than them.

Also, I just noticed now that there's actually nothing stopping you from forcing other players to discard their entire hand with multiple Cavalries, or with Militia followed by Cavalry, etc.  So that's a huge problem.

I don't find the card particularly appealing anyway, but you could easily just cut out the whole attack part and it would still be a very strong $5 I would think.  In fact even just +3 cards, trash up to 3 from hand I think would be a very strong $5, and Cavalry (without the attack) is strictly better than that.

Juggler - I think "+2 Cards, +$2" is generally considered to be a strong $5, and it looks like Juggler is strictly better than that?  So it probably needs a nerf (maybe just make the bonus +$1 or something like that).


As for the main themes, "interacting with the discard pile" might be fine.  But the "returning cards to the supply" thing I think is not a good theme.  Ambassador is the only official card that can return cards to the supply, and I think that's kind of its special thing.  Returning to the supply is generally very similar to trashing; the fact that the supply piles are replenishing a little and that on-trash effects are not triggered (and returned cards can't be dug up by Rogue/Graverobber) are all just minor functions in comparison to the overall purpose of the card.

But another important thing about returning to the supply is that it creates the potential for very long, and possibly even unending, games.  Ambassador tries to solve this problem by making it (usually) only possible to actually increase the size of a supply pile in 2-player games when two cards are returned.  Usually, this only means that the Copper and Estate piles will ever get bigger, which is fine.  But for example with Reconvert, you might want to return expensive cards, which means other supply piles might increase in size.  In that case I guess it's fine since Reconvert will usually force you to gain at least one other card, but it's something to watch out for.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Awaclus on July 29, 2014, 07:29:06 pm
Juggler - I think "+2 Cards, +$2" is generally considered to be a strong $5, and it looks like Juggler is strictly better than that?  So it probably needs a nerf (maybe just make the bonus +$1 or something like that).
It's not strictly better. You gain the Curse first, so the attack is worse for you than for your opponents on average (though, you get to draw cards first, increasing the likelihood of having a Curse in your hand). It's also possible that your opponents' strategies benefit more from "everyone gaining a Curse" than yours, or that they have the Curse to discard and you don't.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 29, 2014, 07:49:48 pm
Comments on a few of the cards:
Thank you very much for your opinion!

Fraud - The reaction is political in 3+ player games (do I discard it now to hurt this player, or hang onto it and hope to hurt the next player?).  I do think it's kind of a cool reaction though.  In fact, I think if you just have it reveal itself instead of discarding, then it's non-political.  Actually, then it has another problem though; if two players disagree on what card they want another player to gain, I think they can go on indefinitely revealing their Frauds?  So I'm not sure there's a clean fix.
I need to think about that. I would really like a card that can change what another player is gaining, but how to solve the political issue? I will try to think of an alternative way, because it should not stand as it is.

Cavalry - Aside from being insanely strong (even without the attack part, I think it would be a very strong $5), the discard attack is too brutal.  [etc.]

Also, I just noticed now that there's actually nothing stopping you from forcing other players to discard their entire hand with multiple Cavalries, or with Militia followed by Cavalry, etc.  So that's a huge problem.

I don't find the card particularly appealing anyway, but you could easily just cut out the whole attack part and it would still be a very strong $5 I would think.  In fact even just +3 cards, trash up to 3 from hand I think would be a very strong $5, and Cavalry (without the attack) is strictly better than that.
Okay yeah, it's too strong. But let's say I want to keep the attack. So I would either cut the +3 cards or, which might be more reasonable, cut the trashing. Mercenary rewards trashing with a discard attack and other bonuses, which is very strong. So maybe Cavalry should make your opponent discard (down to 3) when you place 2 cards on top of your deck? Would that seem fairer?

As for the main themes, "interacting with the discard pile" might be fine.  But the "returning cards to the supply" thing I think is not a good theme.  Ambassador is the only official card that can return cards to the supply, and I think that's kind of its special thing.  Returning to the supply is generally very similar to trashing; the fact that the supply piles are replenishing a little and that on-trash effects are not triggered (and returned cards can't be dug up by Rogue/Graverobber) are all just minor functions in comparison to the overall purpose of the card.

But another important thing about returning to the supply is that it creates the potential for very long, and possibly even unending, games.  Ambassador tries to solve this problem by making it (usually) only possible to actually increase the size of a supply pile in 2-player games when two cards are returned.  Usually, this only means that the Copper and Estate piles will ever get bigger, which is fine.  But for example with Reconvert, you might want to return expensive cards, which means other supply piles might increase in size.  In that case I guess it's fine since Reconvert will usually force you to gain at least one other card, but it's something to watch out for.
I must admit, I did not think about what I want to achieve with returning things to the supply instead of trashing them, yet. There could be cards that care about piles or pile sizes... this part needs a lot more consideration. Until then, this particular theme may not seem so viable .
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: scott_pilgrim on July 29, 2014, 08:01:19 pm
Juggler - I think "+2 Cards, +$2" is generally considered to be a strong $5, and it looks like Juggler is strictly better than that?  So it probably needs a nerf (maybe just make the bonus +$1 or something like that).
It's not strictly better. You gain the Curse first, so the attack is worse for you than for your opponents on average (though, you get to draw cards first, increasing the likelihood of having a Curse in your hand). It's also possible that your opponents' strategies benefit more from "everyone gaining a Curse" than yours, or that they have the Curse to discard and you don't.

Oh right, I was thinking you could return the curse and get +$2, but that's not possible.  It might be okay then.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: GendoIkari on July 29, 2014, 11:56:52 pm
Bivouac's reaction is a bit strange. So the way I read it, you don't have the option to just reveal it, like you do with Horse Traders or Watchtower, right? Rather it needs to get revealed by something else. But the rules don't specifically define when such a thing would trigger... do you intend for it to trigger anytime an effect says "reveal", and it is one of the cards that is shown to your opponent's this way? Or do you intend for it to trigger anytime the card becomes visible to your opponent?

Examples:


Basically, "when this is revealed" isn't a clearly defined event in Dominion.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: GendoIkari on July 29, 2014, 11:59:22 pm
Suburbia... the way it is worded now, you can trash 1 card, then reveal Suburbia from your hand 30 times to draw 30 cards. You are always allowed to reveal the same reaction card multiple times to the same event. Cards like Horse Traders prevent this by having you set it aside, so you would need to do something like that.

Town Portal A looks extremely weak. Without having other Action-Victory cards, or Vault/Cellar/Warehouse/Secret Chamber/Crossroads around, then the action seems to be 99% worthless, so it may as well just be 2VP for $4 (which you would still buy sometimes, but just as a regular VP card).

Town Portal B seems very strong. WAY better than Great Hall at $4 instead of $3. 2 VP instead of 1, and the action is quite strong if you have several Town Portals in your deck. Basically, as long as you have at least 1 in your discard pile, playing 1 is as good as a Laboratory.

I agree with scott_pilgrim on Fraud. The reaction is a really neat attack. Less swingy than Swindler. It might even be too strong, possibly a $5. But I'd start testing with $4 like you have it. But he's also right that there's issues... what if 2 people react to the same gain? I have no idea how to fix it for a 3 or 4 player game, but I hope you find a way, because I like it.

Reconvert... seems ok but weak. Maybe $3 instead? Unless it turns out that it's actually stronger at $4, because you can Reconvert a Reconvert into a $5.

Slurry Pit... I think another Masquerade-thing is a good idea. But note that the rare case of playing Masq when you or an opponent has 0 cards to pass will be a little more common here... as long as their discard pile is empty, they can't pass a card. And if you play it with an empty discard pile, you steal a card from them without giving anything back. It can't pin like Masq can, but it can still "trash" all the cards in their discard pile.

The cards I didn't specifically mention, I like just fine. As a whole I agree with Scott that the returning to the supply is just a worse version of trashing (not worse as in weaker, but worse as in less good or fun for the game). I think it's fine if they just trashed instead. But I think there's some really good ideas in here!
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 30, 2014, 10:48:40 am
Bivouac's reaction is a bit strange. So the way I read it, you don't have the option to just reveal it, like you do with Horse Traders or Watchtower, right? Rather it needs to get revealed by something else. But the rules don't specifically define when such a thing would trigger... do you intend for it to trigger anytime an effect says "reveal", and it is one of the cards that is shown to your opponent's this way? Or do you intend for it to trigger anytime the card becomes visible to your opponent?
The reaction is meant to trigger only when another card makes you explicitly "reveal" it. I'm trying to think of a wording that would make that very clear. Maybe I will just phrase it like "When another card makes you "reveal" this Bivouac,..." - the quote signs are uncomely, but it should be clear this way.
So for your examles the following applies:

You play Sage. As you are revealing cards, you reveal Bivouac. I'm sure the card allows you to react in this case.
Opponent plays Cutpurse. You have no Copper, so you reveal your hand. Bivouac is in your hand. I assume you can use the reaction now, but not 100% sure.
You can trigger the reaction in both cases.

You play Library. As you are drawing cards, you set aside a Bivouac. Can you react now? Nothing said "reveal", but the card was indeed revealed in that your opponent's can now see it.
During cleanup you discard your hand, and your hand included a Bivouac. You put Bivouac on top of the discard pile, so it in now revealed to your opponent. Can you react? (If so, that's a pretty strong ability).
You play Bivouac. When you need to discard a card to it, you discard another Bivouac. That second Bivouac is now revealed, so can you react? (If so, this card is VERY strong, since having another one in hand makes the first one as good as regular village).
As playing the card as an action does not trigger the effect, so does not discarding the card at any time or setting it aside. I should have thought about that. Like Hinterlands or Dark Ages, this set would need to come with some additional rules clarifications as to when a card is "revealed".

Suburbia... the way it is worded now, you can trash 1 card, then reveal Suburbia from your hand 30 times to draw 30 cards. You are always allowed to reveal the same reaction card multiple times to the same event. Cards like Horse Traders prevent this by having you set it aside, so you would need to do something like that.
You have a good point. Of course you should only be able to reveal the card once per trashing. But how do I phrase that? I do not want the card to be discarded from your hand when you use the reaction. Maybe have it set aside and returned to your hand after the trashing? Or just an Outpost-ish phrase like "You may only reveal this once per card trashed or returned."

Town Portal A looks extremely weak. Without having other Action-Victory cards, or Vault/Cellar/Warehouse/Secret Chamber/Crossroads around, then the action seems to be 99% worthless, so it may as well just be 2VP for $4 (which you would still buy sometimes, but just as a regular VP card).
I like to think of it this way: $4 for 2VP may not be a good ratio but at least the card does something, other than most other VP cards at $4 or $5. Scout does a similarly bad thing that only helps you in rare cases with specific cards in the kingdom. But Town Portal A is at least worth 2 VP. While still pretty weak, I would buy it over Scout any day.

Town Portal B seems very strong. WAY better than Great Hall at $4 instead of $3. 2 VP instead of 1, and the action is quite strong if you have several Town Portals in your deck. Basically, as long as you have at least 1 in your discard pile, playing 1 is as good as a Laboratory.
Yes, it's one of those cards that you don't want your opponent to get all 8/10/12 copies of, like Minion, Knights, Gardens, Tournament etc.. However, as you wrote, the Lab effect is conditional. There need to be other City Portals (or Great Halls, Nobles, Harems) in your discard pile, and any time you didn't draw a victory card from your discard pile with it, it's just a cantrip. Also, it's not technically a Lab variant, because you do not cycle 2 cards, but only 1. The second card, if there is one, is recycled from the discard. Playtesting will bring more clarity, hopefully. If anything, I might reduce the VP to 1.

Slurry Pit... I think another Masquerade-thing is a good idea. But note that the rare case of playing Masq when you or an opponent has 0 cards to pass will be a little more common here... as long as their discard pile is empty, they can't pass a card. And if you play it with an empty discard pile, you steal a card from them without giving anything back. It can't pin like Masq can, but it can still "trash" all the cards in their discard pile.
I think passing all your junk to your opponents is not a big problem with Slurry Pit, because they can easily return the favour the turn after. You have a good point with the "stealing" issue, however. I might add the condition that you need at least 1 card in your discard pile to make the action work. But then I would need to shorten the text in another place so it won't get too wordy.

The cards I didn't specifically mention, I like just fine. As a whole I agree with Scott that the returning to the supply is just a worse version of trashing (not worse as in weaker, but worse as in less good or fun for the game). I think it's fine if they just trashed instead. But I think there's some really good ideas in here!
The latter is great to hear :) I plan to make cards that specifically care about the supply piles that should have some (hopefully fun) interaction with the returning actions. For example an inverted City that gets weaker the more piles are empty. If it turns out, I cannot make any interesting stuff with it, I might change it all to trashing. But for now, it's too early to decide.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 30, 2014, 11:26:26 am
I have an idea for Fraud. What if you could only use the reaction when the player to your right gains a card? It would still be somewhat political as you might make your decisions depend on what a specific player might do. But it would be a lot less confusing and chaotic. And Contraband shows that this kind of thing is OK in Dominion.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: GendoIkari on July 30, 2014, 11:47:32 am
The reaction is meant to trigger only when another card makes you explicitly "reveal" it. I'm trying to think of a wording that would make that very clear. Maybe I will just phrase it like "When another card makes you "reveal" this Bivouac,..." - the quote signs are uncomely, but it should be clear this way
....
As playing the card as an action does not trigger the effect, so does not discarding the card at any time or setting it aside. I should have thought about that. Like Hinterlands or Dark Ages, this set would need to come with some additional rules clarifications as to when a card is "revealed".

The "other than while you play it" wording on the card added extra confusion. If you only intend it to trigger when an effect says "reveal", then there's no need for the "other than while you play it" part. That clause made it sound like you intended it for anytime it became visible to your opponent.

You have a good point. Of course you should only be able to reveal the card once per trashing. But how do I phrase that? I do not want the card to be discarded from your hand when you use the reaction. Maybe have it set aside and returned to your hand after the trashing? Or just an Outpost-ish phrase like "You may only reveal this once per card trashed or returned."

Returning to your hand after the trashing won't work; you would still be able to reveal it a second time; reactions are revealed and then resolved 1 at a time. Also, note that if you use an Outpost-type thing to limit it from being used more than once, then even if you have 2 of them in your hand, you wouldn't be able to use each one once. It's not possible for your opponent to know if you have only 1 or 2 of them in your hand. But I don't know any other way to do it.

Yes, it's one of those cards that you don't want your opponent to get all 8/10/12 copies of, like Minion, Knights, Gardens, Tournament etc.. However, as you wrote, the Lab effect is conditional. There need to be other City Portals (or Great Halls, Nobles, Harems) in your discard pile, and any time you didn't draw a victory card from your discard pile with it, it's just a cantrip. Also, it's not technically a Lab variant, because you do not cycle 2 cards, but only 1. The second card, if there is one, is recycled from the discard. Playtesting will bring more clarity, hopefully. If anything, I might reduce the VP to 1.

I just think that even without the discard pile part of it, a cantrip 2 VP is already very good for $4. $4 and $3 aren't that different in cost at all, so a $4 shouldn't generally be a much better version of a $3. And when it hits, you do cycle 2 cards, because you play the second City Portal that you got from your discard pile, thus drawing a second card. No, having 2 of them isn't like having 2 labs; but having 1 in your hand and 1 in your discard does draw 2 cards from your deck (or better depending on what else is in your discard) like a lab does.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: GendoIkari on July 30, 2014, 11:51:24 am
I have an idea for Fraud. What if you could only use the reaction when the player to your right gains a card? It would still be somewhat political as you might make your decisions depend on what a specific player might do. But it would be a lot less confusing and chaotic. And Contraband shows that this kind of thing is OK in Dominion.

I don't think that's good... in a game where only player A buys Fraud, player C has a big disadvantage over player B, though no choice of his or player B's own. Contraband doesn't hurt just 1 other player; it simply allows 1 other player to choose how to hurt the player who played Contraband. If you can find a way to balance it so that you can keep it in your hand, thus not having to choose which player to hurt with it, that would be good I think.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: LastFootnote on July 30, 2014, 12:13:26 pm
I have an idea for Fraud. What if you could only use the reaction when the player to your right gains a card? It would still be somewhat political as you might make your decisions depend on what a specific player might do. But it would be a lot less confusing and chaotic. And Contraband shows that this kind of thing is OK in Dominion.

This doesn't fix the issue when the player gaining the card has a Trader in hand. "I gain a Silver." "No, you gain a Smugglers." "No, I gain a Silver." "No, you gain a Smugglers."

EDIT: Nevermind. Noticed you have to discard the Fraud. Carry on!
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 30, 2014, 12:50:01 pm
I have an idea for Fraud. What if you could only use the reaction when the player to your right gains a card? It would still be somewhat political as you might make your decisions depend on what a specific player might do. But it would be a lot less confusing and chaotic. And Contraband shows that this kind of thing is OK in Dominion.

I don't think that's good... in a game where only player A buys Fraud, player C has a big disadvantage over player B, though no choice of his or player B's own. Contraband doesn't hurt just 1 other player; it simply allows 1 other player to choose how to hurt the player who played Contraband. If you can find a way to balance it so that you can keep it in your hand, thus not having to choose which player to hurt with it, that would be good I think.
I appreciate your consideration but this wouldn't solve the other issue that you addressed: Two or more players could argue infinitely about which card the unfortunate reaction-victim is going to gain. For that reason, Fraud needs to only have one available target player.
It could require you to return it to the supply when you play it as a reaction, so even if only one player in a game with more than 2 players buys a Fraud, their advantage doesn't last for the rest of the game. Also, having it return to the supply rather than get trashed, the other players can always gain their own Frauds...
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: GendoIkari on July 30, 2014, 01:09:17 pm
I have an idea for Fraud. What if you could only use the reaction when the player to your right gains a card? It would still be somewhat political as you might make your decisions depend on what a specific player might do. But it would be a lot less confusing and chaotic. And Contraband shows that this kind of thing is OK in Dominion.

I don't think that's good... in a game where only player A buys Fraud, player C has a big disadvantage over player B, though no choice of his or player B's own. Contraband doesn't hurt just 1 other player; it simply allows 1 other player to choose how to hurt the player who played Contraband. If you can find a way to balance it so that you can keep it in your hand, thus not having to choose which player to hurt with it, that would be good I think.
I appreciate your consideration but this wouldn't solve the other issue that you addressed: Two or more players could argue infinitely about which card the unfortunate reaction-victim is going to gain. For that reason, Fraud needs to only have one available target player.
It could require you to return it to the supply when you play it as a reaction, so even if only one player in a game with more than 2 players buys a Fraud, their advantage doesn't last for the rest of the game. Also, having it return to the supply rather than get trashed, the other players can always gain their own Frauds...

Right, I'd totally forgotten about that issue! I was only thinking about the issue of being political or targeted.

One thing you could do is say "if no one has revealed a Fraud..." This way only 1 person gets to use his Fraud. And the rules already state that if multiple people want to react to the same event, then it goes clockwise from the current player's turn. Of course this would slow things down slightly, as when player A gains a card, player C should wait to see if player B is going to reveal a Fraud before revealing his own. He doesn't want to just reveal it and then give player B the chance to say "wait, I have one too", because that would let player B know that C has a Fraud (plus, B wouldn't want to reveal his Fraud at that point; he'd rather C use his).
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 30, 2014, 01:48:30 pm
One thing you could do is say "if no one has revealed a Fraud..." This way only 1 person gets to use his Fraud. And the rules already state that if multiple people want to react to the same event, then it goes clockwise from the current player's turn. Of course this would slow things down slightly, as when player A gains a card, player C should wait to see if player B is going to reveal a Fraud before revealing his own. He doesn't want to just reveal it and then give player B the chance to say "wait, I have one too", because that would let player B know that C has a Fraud (plus, B wouldn't want to reveal his Fraud at that point; he'd rather C use his).
That's really not the way I want it to go. As you already put out, it makes the reaction very awkward in multiplayer games. For now, I will go with the variant that targets the player to your right and see how it turns out. If it's too unbalanced, I might add the clause that you return it to the supply to trigger the reaction.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Awaclus on July 30, 2014, 02:17:54 pm
Fraud is a lot more political than Contraband. Contraband lets another specific player attempt to hurt you as much as possible, Fraud lets you choose between hurting a specific player or helping yourself. If you're playing for the win, there is never a reason to name politically for Contraband, but there are situations where you have to consider if replacing this specific player's Smithy with a Scout is worth losing Fraud from your hand, and that's political. Furthermore, when you're buying the card, you have to consider if hurting this specific player is important enough to buy a Fraud instead of something that would benefit your own deck more.

If you playtest this card, someone could buy it to hurt you just because you, as the designer of the card, have an advantage. Possession is the only official card that lets a player do that, and it requires other kingdom cards that the victim himself has to buy (edge cases aside) to do any damage, and the damage is usually very minor compared to the other advantages of the card, and hardly ever a reason to buy it.
Title: Re: Card ideas for set themes "return to supply" and "care about discard pile"
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 30, 2014, 06:15:37 pm
Awaclus, I agree with what you say. There's a lot of considering involved as to how important harming your opponent is. However, I'm willing to go that route, at least for an ample testing phase, and see how the card is received as it is.

EDIT: I have another idea how the reaction text of Fraud could be phrased:

"When the player to your right would gain a card, you may reveal this Fraud. If you do, set it aside and choose any card with the same cost for them to gain instead. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand."

This takes away the political decision whether you want to rather harm your opponent or use the action for yourself because you can do both things. But you can only reveal it once and only to one specific player. In multiplayer games, if only one player buys Fraud, the player to their right still has a disadvantage. I'm trying to decide whether I like this better than what GendoIkari suggested earlier:

One thing you could do is say "if no one has revealed a Fraud..." This way only 1 person gets to use his Fraud. And the rules already state that if multiple people want to react to the same event, then it goes clockwise from the current player's turn. Of course this would slow things down slightly, as when player A gains a card, player C should wait to see if player B is going to reveal a Fraud before revealing his own. He doesn't want to just reveal it and then give player B the chance to say "wait, I have one too", because that would let player B know that C has a Fraud (plus, B wouldn't want to reveal his Fraud at that point; he'd rather C use his).

For Bivouac I have a similar solution: If the reaction looked like this,

"When another card makes you reveal this Bivouac, you may set it aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand or on top of your deck."

there should be no confusion with cards that make you reveal cards from your deck until they find something.
Title: Re: Card ideas for interaction with the supply and the discard pile and more
Post by: RobertJ on July 31, 2014, 12:06:48 pm
One other way of resolving the problem of an infinite loop of reveals of fraud would be by making it react to buys rather than gains. Something like:

"When any other player buys a card you may reveal this. If you do choose any card with the same cost for them to gain instead."

If you really wanted to keep the reaction being to gains, a similar solution would be to make the acquisition of the new card be technically not a gain (there is some precedent for this kind of thing with Masquerade in that you do not gain the card passed to you):

"When any other player gains a card you may reveal this. If you do choose any card with the same cost for them to put in their discard pile instead."

Of course this still leaves the problem that the reacting would be a bit awkward in a 3-4 player game.
Title: Re: Card ideas for interaction with the supply and the discard pile and more
Post by: Jack Rudd on July 31, 2014, 01:17:03 pm
Jack Rudd plays a Building Crane...
...drawing 2 cards and gaining +1 Action
...returning the Building Crane to the supply
...trashing a Fortress from the Supply
...putting the Fortress into his hand
Title: Re: Card ideas for interaction with the supply and the discard pile and more
Post by: GendoIkari on July 31, 2014, 01:24:02 pm
Jack Rudd plays a Building Crane...
...drawing 2 cards and gaining +1 Action
...returning the Building Crane to the supply
...trashing a Fortress from the Supply
...putting the Fortress into his hand

Huh? Was this meant for a different thread?
Title: Re: Card ideas for interaction with the supply and the discard pile and more
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 31, 2014, 05:49:42 pm
Jack Rudd plays a Building Crane...
...drawing 2 cards and gaining +1 Action
...returning the Building Crane to the supply
...trashing a Fortress from the Supply
...putting the Fortress into his hand

Huh? Was this meant for a different thread?

I added Building Crane to the set this afternoon ;)
Oh yes, you can do so many shenanigans with Fortress. But Building Crane is a one-shot. It probably needs some adjustment but I don't think that its obvious synergy with Fortress is a problem that needs solving.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 07, 2014, 09:44:08 pm
I have eagerly been working on the set since I started this thread and got to play-test a lot with a friend. Almost all cards have been reworked several times, some have been cut out, and many have been added.

The set now has got the title Roots and Renewal.

I have also constantly been updating the set overview in the first post but unfortunately, no one noticed :( That's why I posted again. I would be very happy if the discussion went on and I can get your opinions on the new cards!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on October 07, 2014, 10:50:09 pm
Some very cool stuff here. Sorry I haven't critiqued it before. I wish there were text versions of the cards for easier quoting, but I will make do.

Quote
Bivouac: Action Ė Reaction, $2
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Discard a card.

When another card makes you reveal this Bivouac, you may set it aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand or on top of your deck.

So. An on-reveal effect is pretty wonky, but maybe doable. I'm pretty certain it shouldn't be a Reaction card. My rule of thumb here is that the Reaction type is for cards that were not necessarily public knowledge. Usually that means the card was in your hand, but Tunnel is also a Reaction because normally you only reveal the top card when discarding several cards at once. Anyway, on-reveal doesn't need to be a Reaction any more than on-gain or on-trash.

Also, I think the option to put this on top of your deck is more words than it's worth. Better to keep the effect simple and I think 95% of the time the player will want to put this in his hand anyway.

Bivouac: Action, $2
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Discard a card.

When you reveal this, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.


Quote
Money Launderer: Action, $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the beginning of your buy phase, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from your hand to the supply.

While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.

Neat effect, but it seems narrow as it is. It would be nice if the card were more generally useful and still had the combos. To this end, I recommend moving the Copper-returning to the start of your Clean-up phase so that you can spend them if you want to. You could even make returning them optional. Returning them is usually the smart thing to do anyway and it saves some "reveal your hand" words. But maybe you want this to combo with Bivouac.

Money Launderer: Action, $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the start of Clean-up, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from it to the Supply.

While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.


Quote
Poacher: Action, $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers from your hand; +2 Cards per Poacher discarded.

Setup: Every player has +1 Buy during turns 1 and 2.

Hmm, this feels like it should be nonterminal. Well, whatever. I think the wording could use work. It looks weak? I guess I'd need to test it before I knew how to tweak it.

Poacher: Action, $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers. +2 Cards per Poacher you discarded.

In games using this, each player gets +1 Buy at the start of his first two turns.


That's the $2 cards. I'm going to bed soon, but I will try to critique the rest later.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 08, 2014, 11:09:02 am
Some very cool stuff here. Sorry I haven't critiqued it before. I wish there were text versions of the cards for easier quoting, but I will make do.
Thank you! I appreciate your critique very much. I assume you know what you're talking about. I noticed that it would be easier if there were also text versions of the cards so I'm going to add those within the next days.

Quote
Bivouac: Action Ė Reaction, $2
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Discard a card.

When another card makes you reveal this Bivouac, you may set it aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand or on top of your deck.

So. An on-reveal effect is pretty wonky, but maybe doable. I'm pretty certain it shouldn't be a Reaction card. My rule of thumb here is that the Reaction type is for cards that were not necessarily public knowledge. Usually that means the card was in your hand, but Tunnel is also a Reaction because normally you only reveal the top card when discarding several cards at once. Anyway, on-reveal doesn't need to be a Reaction any more than on-gain or on-trash.

Also, I think the option to put this on top of your deck is more words than it's worth. Better to keep the effect simple and I think 95% of the time the player will want to put this in his hand anyway.

Bivouac: Action, $2
+1 Card. +2 Actions. Discard a card.

When you reveal this, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.

I can try that out as a non-reaction but I thought you'd need the clarification "When another card makes you reveal this Bivouac" so it is clear that revealing Bivouac upon playing it doesn't count. Maybe I could put "reveal" in quotation marks but that seems awkward.
I found it suitable for a Bivouac to be movable flexibly once revealed so it can go into your hand or onto your deck. Maybe that's more text than what it's worth, though.

Quote
Money Launderer: Action, $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the beginning of your buy phase, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from your hand to the supply.

While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.

Neat effect, but it seems narrow as it is. It would be nice if the card were more generally useful and still had the combos. To this end, I recommend moving the Copper-returning to the start of your Clean-up phase so that you can spend them if you want to. You could even make returning them optional. Returning them is usually the smart thing to do anyway and it saves some "reveal your hand" words. But maybe you want this to combo with Bivouac.

Money Launderer: Action, $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the start of Clean-up, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from it to the Supply.

While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.

I specifically didn't want the Coppers to be spendable during your buy phase because then Money Launderer would be too good for a $2-card, I think. That's why the returning isn't optional and the "reveal your hand" phrase needs to be there to fix accountability issues. The combo with Bivouac was unintentional. I could try Money Lender the way you suggested but that would play very differently and maybe should be worth $3 then?

Now that I've thought about it more, you're right! It would be nice if the card had more combos, like with Apothecary and Counting House. It could just say that you can return any number of Coppers from your hand at the start of Clean-up so that if you spent them, you're stuck with them. But wouldn't it be mostly better than Beggar then because it's non-terminal?

EDIT: I just realized that there's no need to gain 2 Coppers. To benefit from the cost increase of Copper you want to play multiple Money Launderers consecutively anyway which should give you enough Coppers. So gaining just 1 Copper should be fine. Mainly, I was worried about the combo with Coppersmith being too OP. What do you think about this version:

Quote
Money Launderer: Action, $2
+1 Action. Gain a Copper, putting it into your hand. At the start of Clean-up, you may return any number of Coppers from your hand to the supply.

While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.

Quote
Poacher: Action, $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers from your hand; +2 Cards per Poacher discarded.

Setup: Every player has +1 Buy during turns 1 and 2.

Hmm, this feels like it should be nonterminal. Well, whatever. I think the wording could use work. It looks weak? I guess I'd need to test it before I knew how to tweak it.

Poacher: Action, $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers. +2 Cards per Poacher you discarded.

In games using this, each player gets +1 Buy at the start of his first two turns.

Poacher could totally be too weak. It's the very latest card I made and basically a placeholder for a card that can be bought multiples of during the opening, that self-synergizes and becomes weaker later. I want to change the wonky setup-line anyway to replace one of your starting Estates/Shelters with a specific Shelter that gives +Buy. I will present that soon.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on October 08, 2014, 08:31:43 pm
@Money Launderer: I wouldn't worry about a single combo with a card that's not in this set being too OP. Also, Beggar gives you 3 Coppers AND has a Reaction, so I wouldn't worry about comparisons to it. The upshot is I think you should definitely stick with 2 Coppers rather than 1. In general, you seem to be erring on the side of making your cards too weak. I strongly encourage you to err on the side of making them too strong. You're probably going to have to tweak them either way, and playtesters tend to buy cards that look powerful way more than ones that look weak. And your cards can probably afford to be stronger across the board.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Fragasnap on October 08, 2014, 11:51:57 pm
I've transcribed the cards and will critique them later.
Quote
Bivouac
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card, +2 Actions. Discard a card from your hand.
When you reveal this Bivouac, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand or on top of your deck.

Quote
Money Launderer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers , putting them into your hand. At the start of your Buy phase, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from your hand to the Supply.
While this is in play, Coppers cost $1 more.

Quote
Poacher
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers from your hand: +2 Cards per Poacher discarded
Setup: Every player replaces one of their starting Estates/Shelters with a Forest Shack.
Quote
Forest Shack
Types: Action, Shelter
Cost: $1
+1 Action. + $1. You may discard a card from your hand. If you did: +1 Buy.

Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may discard a card from your hand. You may look through your discard pile and return a card from it to the Supply. Shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

Quote
Suburbia
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy.
When you discard this other than during a Clean-Up phase, you may reveal and set aside this Suburbia. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand.

Quote
Tenure
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass them this Tenure. If you don't: +1 Card, +1 Action.

Quote
Blackmail
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
+$2. Return a card from your hand to the Supply. Each other player may discard a Treasure from their hand. If they didn't, they gain a copy of the card you returned.

Quote
Bog Village
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +2 Actions. Choose one: Return a card from the Trash to the Supply; or trash a card costing from $3 to $6 that is not a Victory card from the Supply.

Quote
Fraud
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $4
+$2. Gain a Copper, putting it into your hand.
When another player would gain a card, you may reveal and set aside this Fraud. If you do, choose a card with the same cost for them to gain instead. At the beginning of your next turn. put this into your hand.

Quote
Reconvert
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Return a card from your hand to the Supply and choose one: Gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it, putting it into your hand; or gain 2 cards each costing exactly $1 less than it.

Quote
Siege
Types: Action, Attack, Duration
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Now and at the start of your next turn, each other player with more than 3 cards in hand discards a card.
While this is in play, Victory cards cost $1 more.

Quote
Slurry Pit
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Each player (including you) looks through their discard pile, passes a card from it to the left and puts the received card into their discard pile. You may trash a card from your discard pile.

Quote
Benefit
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Gain 2 cards with a total cost of up to $6. Every other player may gain an Estate
When you gain a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you did, every other player gains a copy of that card.

Quote
Building Crane
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Cards, +2 Actions. Return this to the Supply.
When you return this to the Supply, it costs $1 less during this turn's Buy phase, but not less than $0.

Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Put up to 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck. Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Trash any number of them and put the rest back in any order.

Quote
Juggler
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each player (including you) may discard a Curse from their hand. If they didn't, they gain a Curse, putting it into their hand. You may return a Curse from your hand to the Supply. If you didn't: +$2.

Quote
Prefecture
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 1VP per Province in the Supply.

Quote
Purchase Deal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
$4, +1 Buy. The player to your left chooses a card from the Supply costing from $3 to $6. You have to buy a copy of that card this turn if you have sufficient $ in play.

Quote
Regal Decree
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Do this twice: You may look through your discard pile and play an Action other than Regal Decree from it.

Quote
Royals
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. Return a card from your hand to the Supply. Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand returns a card from their hand to the Supply

Quote
Bastion
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+2 Cards, +1 Action, +$1. Discard a card for each empty Supply pile.

Quote
Beachcomb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $6
+1 Card, +1 Action. Look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
When any player (including you) would trash a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you did, that played does not trash that card, but discards it.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 09, 2014, 06:16:52 am
I've transcribed the cards and will critique them later.
Wow, that's very nice of you! I wanted to do the transcriptions now and add them to the overview post. But now I guess I'll use yours. Thanks for the work! :)

EDIT: I noticed a few aesthetic errors in many of my cards: "Supply" is always written in capital (the "trash", for whatever reason, is not), so are card types. Also, it seems to be unnecessary to specify the "discard" command with the line "from your hand". This is apparently the norm. I will change these things whenever I update the card images. However, with the software I'm using I'm able to create the card images easily and frequently.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: XerxesPraelor on October 11, 2014, 03:28:46 pm
Edit
Quote
Bivouac
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card, +2 Actions. Discard a card from your hand.
When you reveal Bivouac, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand or on top of your deck.

There are a lot of choices here that don't need to be here. That said, it looks balanced, but since revealing it from your hand does nothing, that gets rid of lots of combos. What about this?

Quote
Bivouac
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card, +2 Actions. Discard a card from your hand.
When you reveal Bivouac, set it aside and draw a card. At the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.



Quote
Money Launderer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers , putting them into your hand. At the start of your Buy phase, reveal your hand and return all Coppers from your hand to the Supply.
While this is in play, Copper costs $1 more.

As with what lastfootnote said, this won't be too good if you're allowed to spend them, so why not? $1 increase in price for copper still isn't enough to be interesting.

Quote
Money Launderer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the start of your cleanup phase, reveal your hand and trash all Coppers in your hand.
While this is in play, Copper costs $2 more.

Quote
Poacher
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card. Trash a card from your hand. Discard any number of Poachers from your hand: +2 Cards per Poacher discarded
Setup: Every player replaces one of their starting Estates/Shelters with a Forest Shack.
Quote
Forest Shack
Types: Action, Shelter
Cost: $1
+1 Action. + $1. You may discard a card from your hand. If you did: +1 Buy.

The trash a card seems odd, especially with you having one less useless card in your deck due to forest shack - what about +$1? That's an interesting vanilla bonus that hasn't been done before.

Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may discard a card from your hand. You may look through your discard pile and return a card from it to the Supply. Shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

This is my favorite card - putting your discard on your deck has really interesting consequences. Return a card can here be trash; it doesn't make a big difference though. To avoid the pitfall lf mentioned, what about this: now and when you discard this from play, you may shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

Quote
Suburbia
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may reveal and set this aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand.

Quote
Tenure
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass them this Tenure. If you don't: +1 Card, +1 Action.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on October 11, 2014, 04:33:28 pm
This is my favorite fan expansion I'be seen. (Sorry, LF!) I'LLC give a review of the cards in a bit.

Dude, you do not have to apologize to me for liking somebody else's fan expansion better. Everybody has different tastes.

I think this set has a lot of cool stuff, and I should get back to critiquing the cards. I am not a huge fan of "returning cards to the Supply" as a theme. Mostly trashing the cards is better. Sometimes returning them to the Supply makes sense, like with Money Launderer; otherwise you'd run out of Coppers. With enough cards like that, I'm on board. If it's just being used as a substitute for trashing, I'm not so interested.

EDIT: Specifically, the returning to the Supply also makes sense on Blackmail and Building Crane. On all the other cards, trashing would be just as good or better.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: soulnet on October 11, 2014, 06:14:53 pm
I think Purchase Deal has small but significant wording issues. For instance, can the other player force me to buy Grand Market if I have Coppers in play? What if I play Purchase Deal and Contraband, and the same card is forced and prohibited? (the last one could make sense if I am playing lots of Treasures).


The original card is almost strictly better than this:

Quote
Purchase Deal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $1. Gain a Silver.

Which is not really powerful but could be ok.

I think this wording works better and makes the card stronger, but not hugely unbalanced:

Quote
Purchase Deal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $4. The player to your left chooses a card from the Supply costing from $3 to $6. Gain the chosen card. -$1 for each $1 in its cost, to a minimum of $0.

Notice that I removed the +Buy, because you are now gaining without buying. If you want to be more precise, you could add "If you did not gain a card, +1 Buy", but it does not make sense to me. I would either leave it as is, or add +1 Buy unconditionally. You can add "you cannot play more Treasures this turn" or "While this is in play, Treasures other than PD are worth $0" to make it more similar to the original text (i.e., force to play PD last), but I would test this as is. It seems weak anyway.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 12, 2014, 05:37:29 am
This is my favorite fan expansion I'be seen. (Sorry, LF!) I'LLC give a review of the cards in a bit.
That is nice to hear. Nonetheless Roots and Renewal is clearly far from being acceptable for me as an expansion. Almost all cards still need tweaking, nerfing or buffing in order to be functioning. LFN said that his Enterprise set will probably never be finished, although there went a lot more time into developing his set than into mine. So for R'n'R the same applies even more - that it is even farther from being finished, and will never be. But thank you anyway :)

I think this set has a lot of cool stuff, and I should get back to critiquing the cards. I am not a huge fan of "returning cards to the Supply" as a theme. Mostly trashing the cards is better. Sometimes returning them to the Supply makes sense, like with Money Launderer; otherwise you'd run out of Coppers. With enough cards like that, I'm on board. If it's just being used as a substitute for trashing, I'm not so interested.

EDIT: Specifically, the returning to the Supply also makes sense on Blackmail and Building Crane. On all the other cards, trashing would be just as good or better.
In the beginning, there wasn't really a reason for returning stuff to the supply. I aim to include more cards like Bastion that synergize with Supply piles and sometimes want you to return cards to make them stronger. Regal Decree originally cared for the Supply, too. However, the only way it didn't have the same issues as BoM made it too similar to the same.

I can see your point for Draft Horses. There is currently no reason not to just trash the card instead of return. Reconvert returns the card so that you can double it by converting it into 2 cheaper cards, and later reconvert the cheaper cards into more expensive cards each, again. This might be a waste of time, though... Bog Village can return cards from the trash to the Supply which can tactically be very interesting,

I think. I'm currently working on tweaking Royalty and scratch the line "Return a card from your hand to the Supply." Instead, I want to make it stronger as an attack. These are ideas I have in mind:
Quote
Royalty A, $5, Action/Attack: + 3 Cards. Every other player draws a card. If they have 5 or more cards in hand, they return a card from it to the Supply.
Quote
Royalty B, $5, Action/Attack: + 3 Cards. Every other player draws until they have 5 cards in hand and return a card from their hand to the Supply.
Version A works better in combination with discard attacks. However, version B is stronger on its own and also works fine with discard attacks if you play those after you played Royalty. Both versions are more devastating when played consecutively but B makes the opponent cycle more if combined with a discard attack. I kind of makes sense to have the cards be returned instead of trashed here so they aren't lost forever. Still, both versions of Royalty can obliterate an opponent's deckwhen played in an engine. I tested this. It's pretty nasty. Do you think these versions are too devastating?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on October 13, 2014, 01:56:09 pm
Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may discard a card from your hand. You may look through your discard pile and return a card from it to the Supply. Shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

I've mentioned already that returning a card to the Supply seems out of place here. Other than making it on-theme, there's no reason the card couldn't be trashed. As a general note, the entire concept of returning cards to the Supply is not great because it can keep the game from moving toward an ending condition. It's fine for stuff like Money Launderer (where it's way less useful if the Coppers run out) or Blackmail (where you want the attack to stay relevant for a while). But as a general substitute for trashing, it's bad.

Anyhow, Draft Horses seems super-weak. You pseudo-trash one card from your hand or discard pile, then shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck. The singleton trashing is weak by itself, and unlike "put your deck into your discard pile", shuffling your discard pile immediately and putting it onto your deck doesn't shuffle in the cards you gained this turn. It's going to be a penalty way more often than a bonus. And of course it means that if you throne Draft Horses, you can really only trash one card from your discard pile and the rest have to come from your hand.

I am struggling to find any part of this card worth saving. Even if you were to add a vanilla bonus to make it less weak, what's the concept here? How is this different from what has come before?


Quote
Suburbia
Types: Action - Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may reveal and set this aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand.

I have tried this Reaction before, on Village for $4 and Peddler for $5. We didn't find it very fun. Unlike Tunnel, which you're happy to discard on your turn, you usually would rather play an Action like this. Maybe you'll have better luck with it.

I think the action is too weak for $3, even with the reaction added.


Quote
Tenure
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass them this Tenure. If you don't: +1 Card, +1 Action.

Interesting idea. If you pass this, it goes into the player to your left's hand, so he could play it and eventually it could go around the table and hit you even before your next turn, stealing the card you just stole. But it takes an Action, so maybe not everybody plays it. Hmm. Yeah, I think this is worth testing as-is. Here's my suggested wording:

Quote
Tenure
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass this to them. Otherwise, +1 Card, +1 Action.


That's the $3 cards. I'll try to critique some more later.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 13, 2014, 04:26:25 pm
Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may discard a card from your hand. You may look through your discard pile and return a card from it to the Supply. Shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

I've mentioned already that returning a card to the Supply seems out of place here. Other than making it on-theme, there's no reason the card couldn't be trashed. As a general note, the entire concept of returning cards to the Supply is not great because it can keep the game from moving toward an ending condition. It's fine for stuff like Money Launderer (where it's way less useful if the Coppers run out) or Blackmail (where you want the attack to stay relevant for a while). But as a general substitute for trashing, it's bad.

Anyhow, Draft Horses seems super-weak. You pseudo-trash one card from your hand or discard pile, then shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck. The singleton trashing is weak by itself, and unlike "put your deck into your discard pile", shuffling your discard pile immediately and putting it onto your deck doesn't shuffle in the cards you gained this turn. It's going to be a penalty way more often than a bonus. And of course it means that if you throne Draft Horses, you can really only trash one card from your discard pile and the rest have to come from your hand.

I am struggling to find any part of this card worth saving. Even if you were to add a vanilla bonus to make it less weak, what's the concept here? How is this different from what has come before?

I already noticed myself that Draft Horses is weak. I plan on letting it return/trash up to 2 cards from your discard pile, but I wanted to wait for your impression on Draft Horses first. Anyway, it desperately needs in engine, otherwise it will just slow you down heavily. I know it's an awkward concept that is rarely helpful. Yet I think in some situations it might really shine and I want to test and look for these. There are some original cards that have similarly questionable abilities, too, and are seldom bought, like Scout, Counting House or Navigator, but sometimes they are.

I agree that Draft Horses have no reason to return cards instead of trashing them. Maybe I will find a way to make it matter, or I might change it to trash. Anyhow, the set's concept should be more than just "returning stuff to the supply", it's interaction with the supply in general. I hope I can justify returning instead of trashing more by elaborating smarter card interactions revolving around that concept. For me it's not a concern that returning cards may "keep the game from moving toward an ending condition" because I found that the cards as-they-are are unlikely to impede the game's ending. They are meant to allow players to alternate supply conditions which some cards like Prefecture and Bastion want.

Quote
Suburbia
Types: Action - Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may reveal and set this aside. At the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand.

I have tried this Reaction before, on Village for $4 and Peddler for $5. We didn't find it very fun. Unlike Tunnel, which you're happy to discard on your turn, you usually would rather play an Action like this. Maybe you'll have better luck with it.

I think the action is too weak for $3, even with the reaction added.

Suburbia seemed to work okay during playtests, but not great. I find it hard to make the action part good enough while keeping it at $3 without getting too close to original cards like Fishing Village or Village. However, you seemed to have overlooked that Suburbia is set aside and returned to your hand when it gets discarded so it's actually a pretty good counter to discard attacks and deck-milling attacks. Especially against the latter since it increases your handsize next turn and you can also play it then.
(Originally, Suburbia could be set aside for next turn if you trash or return a card to the supply (similar to Market Square), although I never tested this.)


Quote
Tenure
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass them this Tenure. If you don't: +1 Card, +1 Action.

Interesting idea. If you pass this, it goes into the player to your left's hand, so he could play it and eventually it could go around the table and hit you even before your next turn, stealing the card you just stole. But it takes an Action, so maybe not everybody plays it. Hmm. Yeah, I think this is worth testing as-is. Here's my suggested wording:

Quote
Tenure
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Look through the discard pile of the player to your left. You may gain a card from it costing up to $6. If you do, pass this to them. Otherwise, +1 Card, +1 Action.

I like your suggestion for rewording Tenure. I noticed that "pass" is not a defined term and actually I mean Tenure to say "If you do, put this into their discard pile" which would make it noticeably stronger. Do you think this would still be okay?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on October 13, 2014, 04:58:21 pm
Suburbia seemed to work okay during playtests, but not great. I find it hard to make the action part good enough while keeping it at $3 without getting too close to original cards like Fishing Village or Village. However, you seemed to have overlooked that Suburbia is set aside and returned to your hand when it gets discarded so it's actually a pretty good counter to discard attacks and deck-milling attacks. Especially against the latter since it increases your handsize next turn and you can also play it then.
(Originally, Suburbia could be set aside for next turn if you trash or return a card to the supply (similar to Market Square), although I never tested this.)

I didn't miss it. The protection against discard and deck-milling Attacks definitely works well. But I guess I wanted the Reaction to be more widely-applicable, like Tunnel is. And I found that the decision of whether to discard it with e.g. Oasis wasn't fun in practice. I didn't give it that much of a chance, though.

You could try [+2 Actions; +1 Buy; +$1]. That might be fine at $3.

I like your suggestion for rewording Tenure. I noticed that "pass" is not a defined term and actually I mean Tenure to say "If you do, put this into their discard pile" which would make it noticeably stronger. Do you think this would still be okay?

"Pass" is a defined term (in the Intrigue rules) and the passed card goes right to the player's hand. My gut says Tenure might be too strong if it goes into the player's discard pile instead. I'd try it to hand first and see how that goes.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: XerxesPraelor on October 14, 2014, 01:50:56 pm
I've edited in my thoughts - I won't post from now on, but FYI I'll continue editing things into that one post.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 14, 2014, 04:56:28 pm
I've edited in my thoughts - I won't post from now on, but FYI I'll continue editing things into that one post.

Thank you very much!

Quote
Bivouac
There are a lot of choices here that don't need to be here. That said, it looks balanced, but since revealing it from your hand does nothing, that gets rid of lots of combos. What about this?

Quote
Bivouac
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card, +2 Actions. Discard a card from your hand.
When you reveal Bivouac, set it aside and draw a card. At the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.

Setting it aside must be optional, otherwise if you play cards like Crossroads you would be forced to set aside Bivouacs from your hand until next turn. I want to text the card more with the option of topdecking Bivouac. If it turns out to be never used I might scratch that decision.

Quote
Money Launderer

As with what lastfootnote said, this won't be too good if you're allowed to spend them, so why not? $1 increase in price for copper still isn't enough to be interesting.

Quote
Money Launderer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the start of your cleanup phase, reveal your hand and trash all Coppers in your hand.
While this is in play, Copper costs $2 more.

The next update of the set will include that you can play and keep the Coppers. Bumping up the cost increase is a serious consideration if it makes the card more interesting without overpowering it for $2.

Quote
Poacher
Quote
Forest Shack

The trash a card seems odd, especially with you having one less useless card in your deck due to forest shack - what about +$1? That's an interesting vanilla bonus that hasn't been done before.

I have no idea if Poacher works out like this. It urgently needs testing. At least, I hope it's clear why Poacher has a self-synergy like this and why it comes with a Shelter that gives +Buy. Because you want multiple Poachers in one hand, I figured it might be appropriate that they can help you thin.


Quote
Draft Horses

This is my favorite card - putting your discard on your deck has really interesting consequences. Return a card can here be trash; it doesn't make a big difference though. To avoid the pitfall lf mentioned, what about this: now and when you discard this from play, you may shuffle your discard pile and put it on top of your deck.

I like Draft Horses a lot, too. However, LFN is right in that it's too weak. What if I just took the main effect - topdecking from your discard pile - and made something like this:

Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+$1. You may discard a card. You may look through your discard pile, reveal up to 3 Action cards from it and put them on top of your deck in any order.

This seems way more useful. If it's not balanced, there's enough room for tweaking. Any comments on this suggestion?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: XerxesPraelor on October 14, 2014, 07:31:19 pm
If it's too weak, just add some other bonus. (Gain an non-victory card costing up to $4 is a fitting bonus if you're really scared it's not good) The cool part about it is the "Put your discard pile on top of your deck - it would be a shame if you changed that. I can imagine this could be part of a faster "gain the supply" puzzle and is really good for cycling (and it makes knowing your deck well even more of a skill)

----
Oh, now I get Poacher's trashing. Yeah, I think it fits the card.
----
If biouvac was +3 actions (maybe even +$1 too) (some person playtested +3 actions for $2 and found it okay but a little weak) you'd have more of a reason to leave it till next time.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 14, 2014, 08:32:21 pm
If it's too weak, just add some other bonus. (Gain an non-victory card costing up to $4 is a fitting bonus if you're really scared it's not good) The cool part about it is the "Put your discard pile on top of your deck - it would be a shame if you changed that. I can imagine this could be part of a faster "gain the supply" puzzle and is really good for cycling (and it makes knowing your deck well even more of a skill)

How is putting your discard pile onto your deck good for cycling? I might rather slow you down immensely unless you have mostly engine components in your discard pile. If you don't, you shouldn't buy or use Draft Horses as it is currently. Just think how Mandarin is bought so rarely but Inn is frequently; it's because Mandarin puts a lot of crap onto your deck and slow you down but Inn shuffles valuable engine components into it. So I figured I should rather focus the card more on engines (returning cards to the supply doesn't need to be on it). I appreciate that you like the card as-is but it needs some boost. I guess gaining an Action card and then topdecking your discard pile would work but I'm not a fan of it. There are definitely several options to test for Draft Horses.

If biouvac was +3 actions (maybe even +$1 too) (some person playtested +3 actions for $2 and found it okay but a little weak) you'd have more of a reason to leave it till next time.
I suppose you mean just +3 Actions, +$1? I don't see why you would rather topdeck a card that doesn't draw cards rather than putting it into your hand. That seems very slow to me. Am I missing something?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: soulnet on October 15, 2014, 04:08:27 am
Putting discard on deck is not that different than putting deck on discard a la Chancellor. The diacard contains your most recent gains, which are usually tue best cards in your deck (until tue greening).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 15, 2014, 07:30:40 am
Putting discard on deck is not that different than putting deck on discard a la Chancellor. The diacard contains your most recent gains, which are usually tue best cards in your deck (until tue greening).

So would you say that Draft Horses is currently better, worse, or equally as bad as Chancellor? I really cannot tell from your post.

I think Purchase Deal has small but significant wording issues. For instance, can the other player force me to buy Grand Market if I have Coppers in play? What if I play Purchase Deal and Contraband, and the same card is forced and prohibited? (the last one could make sense if I am playing lots of Treasures).


The original card is almost strictly better than this:

Quote
Purchase Deal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $1. Gain a Silver.

Which is not really powerful but could be ok.

I think this wording works better and makes the card stronger, but not hugely unbalanced:

Quote
Purchase Deal
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $4. The player to your left chooses a card from the Supply costing from $3 to $6. Gain the chosen card. -$1 for each $1 in its cost, to a minimum of $0.

Notice that I removed the +Buy, because you are now gaining without buying. If you want to be more precise, you could add "If you did not gain a card, +1 Buy", but it does not make sense to me. I would either leave it as is, or add +1 Buy unconditionally. You can add "you cannot play more Treasures this turn" or "While this is in play, Treasures other than PD are worth $0" to make it more similar to the original text (i.e., force to play PD last), but I would test this as is. It seems weak anyway.

Yeah, about Purchase Deal... it's really the least compelling card in the set for me, a mere idea for a card that might replace Fraud. Fraud was originally supposed to be s Swindler variant (i. e. another player trashes a card and you decide what they gain with the same cost). I think Fraud is not a nice card and very wordy. Purchase Deal is an attempt to cofer the decision on the other player but this is a) not very intriguing, and b) too similar to Contraband. I've thought about other variations of this with tokens or a Duration card indicating an obligation to buy a certain card but these are too difficult to keep track of.

Your second suggestion might be worth trying, although I'm not happy about the whole concept in general. I would rather scratch it unless people tell me they think Fraud (or Purchase Deal) was a fun card and they would like to play with it. Anyone?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: XerxesPraelor on October 15, 2014, 10:14:57 am
You would want to topdeck a card that gives +actions if you have no terminals in your hand.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 19, 2014, 11:54:01 pm
Quote
Prefecture
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 1VP per Province in the Supply.
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.

Maybe try this?:
Quote
Prefecture
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 1VP plus 1 per 2 Provinces in the Supply (rounded down).
It's still worth 7VP when no provinces are bought in 3+player, but that's a lot closer to reasonable. Also, this way, it's not completely dead when the game ends by the provinces going empty.
I might say "Worth 1VP plus 1 per 2 Provinces in the Supply (round up only in 2-player games, otherwise round down)" but that would be unorthodox. Personally, I'm okay with unorthodox, but it seems not many people around here are like me that way...

PS: Yay, I'm a golem now! That's so much cooler than being a moneylender...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 20, 2014, 05:24:18 am
Quote
Prefecture
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 1VP per Province in the Supply.
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.

Maybe try this?:
Quote
Prefecture
Types: Victory
Cost: $5
Worth 1VP plus 1 per 2 Provinces in the Supply (rounded down).
It's still worth 7VP when no provinces are bought in 3+player, but that's a lot closer to reasonable. Also, this way, it's not completely dead when the game ends by the provinces going empty.
I might say "Worth 1VP plus 1 per 2 Provinces in the Supply (round up only in 2-player games, otherwise round down)" but that would be unorthodox. Personally, I'm okay with unorthodox, but it seems not many people around here are like me that way...

You're right, I didn't think of multiplayer games because I don't like to play them so much. As I see it, for Prefecture, the price point of $5 is more important than a lot of points because it has to compete with Province at a reasonably low cost to make you ignore Provinces completely. That means you would aim at a 3-pile-ending anyway.
I might say "Worth 1 per 2 Provinces in the Supply (rounded up)" so that in a 2-player-game where only one player goes for Prefectures buying a single Province does not reduce the VP of a Prefecture to 3VP (at which point buying Duchies would be much safer).

I know there are probably several people who say "Co0kieL0rd, this has been tried a million times, it never works out and anyway, I don't like that concept that clearly goes against what we all know and like about Dominion!" I just think that such a card would fit the theme "interaction with the Supply" nicely. Of course Prefecture should not be overpowered but I took into account that its VP are kind of elusive, more so than with any other Victory card.

PS: Yay, I'm a golem now! That's so much cooler than being a moneylender...

I can't wait not to be a dumb Navigator anymore...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Awaclus on October 20, 2014, 07:35:31 am
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.
It doesn't matter how much it's worth during the game, it only matters how much it's worth after the game has ended. If the game ends on Provinces, it's worth nothing. The game has to end on piles for it to be worth anything, and although that is more common in 3+ player games, it's not because there are more Provinces but because there are more players emptying the 10-card piles.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 21, 2014, 01:25:25 am
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.
It doesn't matter how much it's worth during the game, it only matters how much it's worth after the game has ended. If the game ends on Provinces, it's worth nothing. The game has to end on piles for it to be worth anything, and although that is more common in 3+ player games, it's not because there are more Provinces but because there are more players emptying the 10-card piles.
Exactly. That's why no one would bother buying provinces in a 3+ player game with this card out -because a 3-pile ending is more likely anyway with 3+ players and even moreso if anyone is going for prefectures (because they'll be trying to empty piles also). It's like you're agreeing with me while making it sound like you're disagreeing...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Awaclus on October 21, 2014, 06:38:08 am
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.
It doesn't matter how much it's worth during the game, it only matters how much it's worth after the game has ended. If the game ends on Provinces, it's worth nothing. The game has to end on piles for it to be worth anything, and although that is more common in 3+ player games, it's not because there are more Provinces but because there are more players emptying the 10-card piles.
Exactly. That's why no one would bother buying provinces in a 3+ player game with this card out -because a 3-pile ending is more likely anyway with 3+ players and even moreso if anyone is going for prefectures (because they'll be trying to empty piles also). It's like you're agreeing with me while making it sound like you're disagreeing...
It's not that much more likely. If one player goes for Prefectures and the other two go for Provinces, the one who goes for Prefectures has a very good chance of losing the game. If one player goes for Prefectures and another goes for Prefectures, then the third player also has to go for Prefectures because if he goes for Provinces, he probably loses.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 21, 2014, 07:31:25 am
Why would anyone buy provinces in a 3+ player game with this on the board?  5-cost 12 VP. that's kinda insane. And it takes six province buys to get this to be worth less than a province.
It doesn't matter how much it's worth during the game, it only matters how much it's worth after the game has ended. If the game ends on Provinces, it's worth nothing. The game has to end on piles for it to be worth anything, and although that is more common in 3+ player games, it's not because there are more Provinces but because there are more players emptying the 10-card piles.
Exactly. That's why no one would bother buying provinces in a 3+ player game with this card out -because a 3-pile ending is more likely anyway with 3+ players and even moreso if anyone is going for prefectures (because they'll be trying to empty piles also). It's like you're agreeing with me while making it sound like you're disagreeing...
It's not that much more likely. If one player goes for Prefectures and the other two go for Provinces, the one who goes for Prefectures has a very good chance of losing the game. If one player goes for Prefectures and another goes for Prefectures, then the third player also has to go for Prefectures because if he goes for Provinces, he probably loses.
I can see both your points and I guess this card - if I was to leave it as it is - should be tested in several multiplayer games so check if there are boards where going for Provinces would still be the more viable option. I'm sure there are... still I should probably consider reducing the total points a Prefecture can be worth.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 27, 2014, 10:08:13 am
BIG UPDATE

I reworked almost all the cards, expunged a lot of intra-set redundancy, cleaned up mess wording, and added some new cards. You can always see the current complete set in the OP. In this post I only list the major changes and new cards.


There are 6 new kingdom cards and 2 ancillary cards. Each of them has been tested at least once.


The following cards have been scratched from the set:
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: silverspawn on October 27, 2014, 12:34:11 pm
visual critique: the text seems a bit off on some cards. I think especially the vanilla effects are too small. the exception here is forest hud.
wording: you keep using "every other player" instead of "each other player." any reason? official cards use "each". more specific wording suggestions on the cards.

Bivouac: I don't really have anything to say here, which is a good thing. It looks solid.

Money Launderer: I think it should be "at the start of Clean-up this turn." Not because that sounds better, but because Scheme uses this wording. it's good to stay as close to official cards as possible.

I'm not sure how useful this really is. I like that it can do very different things with a simple effect though. It may be okay. Hard to say.

Poacher: I think this goes under the "cards that count itself" list. As such, it's good that it's cheap. I like the idea to couple it with an innate +buy early. It looks nice.

Builder: I'm... not sure about this. Not because it hurts the attacker, but because it's weird. If the attack is a witch, you can reveal it to get... a necropolis? And why is the "normal" effect a bridge without buy? I guess that "combos" with battlement, but you have to play the terminal first. Also, it's weird that it just plays in your deck.

This is too complex to just predict how it plays out without testing though. It's possible that it's super fun, then it's worth the awkwardness/lengthiness.

Draft Horses: Mh, might work. I kind of see frustration upon an empty discard pile, but maybe it's okay.

Suburbia: I'd probably copy the original wordings here too. The reaction is a mix of Tunnel and Horse Traders. That'd be: "If you discard this other than during a Clean-up phase, you may reveal and set it aside. If you do, then at the start of your next turn, put this into your hand"

I'm again not sure how fun this is. that's often a sign of good cards though. It looks solid.

Tenure: Uh, what? Why? This is political. And it's also strong and swingy. No-one is making political cards. I appreciate breaking conventional rules with reactions that hurt the attacker, but not with political attacks. They're "banned" from dominion for a reason.

Town Portal: I've tried giving up your turn in order to help the next turn before, and it didn't work. But you might have the better idea on what kind of card to put it on. Still, it's a tactician that only works when you're being attacked. Not a fan.

Blackmail: The attack is not bad, but the card looks too strong, at least to me. Even without the attack, it's +2$, trash a card from your hand, which is really good. With the attack, it's closer to +3$, which is probably stronger than masquerade, or at least about as good. I don't know how much you tested this, but I'd try it with +1$. I'd probably make the attack optional too.

Bog Village: There is a misplaced "from" in the text.
I don't like this one. I think a card that can trash from the supply should

a) either do something else that makes it non-trivial, or have another choice instead, and
b) trash two cards, because if you just trash one, one play changes the pile split into your favor, but only if you're the first one to buy this. That sounds unfun and like a first player advantage

and this card does neither. I mean, it can also get the cards back to the supply, but then what's even the point? you remove it, I put it back, then I buy it. and why is the 3$-6$ even there? you already restricted it to non-victory cards. I think you could just do "kingdom card".

Fraud: Uh. Please don't. I just know this will be frustrating, because the reaction is super powerful on 5$'s, so you always have to evaluate if it's worth risking to buy them. I already dislike this aspect about smugglers, and this is far worse.

You say you're trying variations, so good luck here. The reaction needs to change though.

Reconvert: I think this is just broken? it's so good on estates. remodel is already okay to turn estates into silver, or develop to topdeck them, and this one gives them into your hand. that's so good. I also don't like how the trash effect is just as good as a remodel.

Royalty: Mh. The top half of this is probably too strong for a 4$, but the bottom half usually helps your opponent. I... don't like it. It's too swingy. the attack is anything from "lose a silver" to "trash a bad card" or even "downgrade a province". I mean, if you like swindler, maybe you like this too. It seems similar to me, a better top half, a much weaker attack, but just as swingy.

Siege: This looks really weak. Even if TfB is present, it also works for your opponent, so you really don't produce resources. And the attack isn't even good. Yea, not feelings this one. I'm pretty sure this is one of the weakest cards in the game.

Quote
Dominion doesnít have enough Masquerade!
I'll skip this one

Benefit: Uh, why the penalty? I don't see a reason why it's there. But also, this can lead to some interactions that I'm pretty sure you don't want to have. I play Benefit, you gain an estate. You discard Benefit, now I gain an Estate. I discard Benefit, now you gain an estate? And that's just 2 player. So, I really only see the top part working here.

Building Crane: Not seeing it. it's not nearly powerful enough for a one-shot, and the cost reduction... well, I don't think it's enough. A version for 4$ without the reduction would be pretty much strictly better, and I doubt it would be great.

Demagogue: Let's go through the options
-> empty discard pile: witch with +1 card. crazy good.
-> non-empty discard pile: smithy with... a weird effect. the new cards come into play faster, but the current cards much slower.

So, you play it, and it's either super good already, or it does a weird but probably strong attack, only to be a crazy strong attack the second time. That doesn't sound good to me, but there's an even bigger problem. Say your opponent has a dud hand and you have an engine (not a very unlikely scenario). He buys a silver or something, you play your deck. his dud hand gets back on top of his draw pile. next hand, he still has a dud hand. pin. and it's not even something you work for, it just kind of happens randomly.

Deposit: This looks neat. It does two very different things, which is courtyarding and trashing, and it can even do both at ones. it looks strong, but not overpowered, and pretty unique. I like it a lot.

Juggler: Mh. I'll just read this as a +2 cards, +2$ variant, an effect which, according to Donald (and my intuition), is "strong and uninteresting." The uninteresting part doesn't have to bother you, because this card does a lot an addition. But the powerlevel is questionable. You have more cards, so there's a bigger chance for a curse to be in them. You also have more flexibility. So, it's probably stronger than +2 cards, +2$, which probably means it'll often dominate.

It also has a duration problem. Because you return the curses to the supply, it can just junk forever. And then there's the self-damaging attack thing. You can't defend against this with reaction cards due to their wording, but your opponents can, and then it still attacks you.

It's not that clear how it plays out though.

Prefecture: Okay... so, it starts with 8VP (assuming 2p). that's better than province. But in a lot of games, it will just go down to zero. I don't think I can make a safe guess how it plays out, but I fear that it might be either too strong or just useless. Could be wrong here.

Reparations/Bastion: No big love, but they both look decent. And again, they might be really fun to play with. I like Bastion a little bit more.

Beachcomb: Political reaction in 3player. Also, you trash multiple cards at once. And if several people want to use the reaction, is it about who discards it first? do you have to ask everyone? For most reactions, the order doesn't matter.  I don't see a fix for the reaction, there might be one, but as is I'd remove it. It causes too many problems.

I also don't like the top part. I consider it a variant of the "name a card, dig for that card, put it into your hand" effect, which I'm sure a lot of people have considered before. And yea, that's not a good idea. Your version is certainly better, because it resolves faster and isn't as powerful, but I still don't like it, mostly because it's so swingy.

One of the cards from my collection post (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11405.msg395237#msg395237) is:

Quote
c4 - Action - ?
+1 Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or look through your discard pile, and put a card from it into your hand.

which I think is the better way to do this (less swingy), but I even consider this version to be probably not worth doing, which is why it's still in the collection post.

Mandate: Another complex card... well, but I don't think we need a Band of Misfits variant... and it's really similar too. Meh.

I couldn't help noticing that the cards seem to be best near the top. the quality progression is sort of like a check mark... is that coincidence? are the top cards better tested?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 27, 2014, 02:20:16 pm
Thank you a lot for going through my cards! I appreciate it.
visual critique: the text seems a bit off on some cards. I think especially the vanilla effects are too small. the exception here is forest hud.
wording: you keep using "every other player" instead of "each other player." any reason? official cards use "each". more specific wording suggestions on the cards.
Yeah, the visual implementation is not the best. I don't design the cards myself like LFN does but I use a simulator which automatically creates a card with a text and image I provide. This is way faster and shall suffice as long as my set is far from being acceptable as a whole.
Thanks for pointing out wordings that are not according to the original. I will fix that with the next update.

Quote
Poacher: I think this goes under the "cards that count itself" list. As such, it's good that it's cheap. I like the idea to couple it with an innate +buy early. It looks nice.
Yeah, I'm also pleased how that turned out. It does a pretty good job of early trashing without necessarily having "dead" turns as with Chapel or often Steward.
Quote
Builder: I'm... not sure about this. Not because it hurts the attacker, but because it's weird. If the attack is a witch, you can reveal it to get... a necropolis? And why is the "normal" effect a bridge without buy? I guess that "combos" with battlement, but you have to play the terminal first. Also, it's weird that it just plays in your deck.
I'm considering removing the cost restriction for Battlement. Actually, there's not really a point to it other than fear that it might be too strong. You already got attacked when you get it, so you should get a chance to strike back for good.

Quote
Tenure: Uh, what? Why? This is political. And it's also strong and swingy. No-one is making political cards. I appreciate breaking conventional rules with reactions that hurt the attacker, but not with political attacks. They're "banned" from dominion for a reason.
It's one of the earlier cards I made. I thought, I want a Swindler variant and it should have something to do with the discard pile. I can probably do better than that. I just recently got to test it with friends and they didn't like it too much. Also, it's often just a useless cantrip in your hand. Why is it still in the set? Uh... because LFN said it might be good?

Quote
Town Portal: I've tried giving up your turn in order to help the next turn before, and it didn't work. But you might have the better idea on what kind of card to put it on. Still, it's a tactician that only works when you're being attacked. Not a fan.
I like the reaction but it's probably not a good idea to put it on an alt-VP card because that means that you really don't want to buy it at all if there's no handsize attack on the board. Tunnel sometimes faces a similar problem but its reaction is probably more exciting than Town Portal's.

Quote
Blackmail: The attack is not bad, but the card looks too strong, at least to me. Even without the attack, it's +2$, trash a card from your hand, which is really good. With the attack, it's closer to +3$, which is probably stronger than masquerade, or at least about as good. I don't know how much you tested this, but I'd try it with +1$. I'd probably make the attack optional too.
I don't understand how the attack makes it closer to +$3. Initially the attack was optional and I thought it was too good, the attack alone being almost strictly better than Cutpurse and often equally harmful as Milita. That's why I made the attack mandatory so in the later game you wouldn't play it as often. It's still powerful but reasonable, IMO.

Quote
Bog Village: There is a misplaced "from" in the text.
I don't like this one. I think a card that can trash from the supply should

a) either do something else that makes it non-trivial, or have another choice instead, and
b) trash two cards, because if you just trash one, one play changes the pile split into your favor, but only if you're the first one to buy this. That sounds unfun and like a first player advantage

and this card does neither. I mean, it can also get the cards back to the supply, but then what's even the point? you remove it, I put it back, then I buy it. and why is the 3$-6$ even there? you already restricted it to non-victory cards. I think you could just do "kingdom card".
Restricting it to "kingdom" cards is a good idea, I'll do that. It's more or less what I had in mind, anyway. If I was to change that card, I would rather adhere to your suggestion a). However, the choice fits the theme of Roots and Renewal and interacts with several cards from the set, like Bastion, Reparations, Reconvert, and Dark Ages cards.
Quote
Fraud: Uh. Please don't. I just know this will be frustrating, because the reaction is super powerful on 5$'s, so you always have to evaluate if it's worth risking to buy them. I already dislike this aspect about smugglers, and this is far worse.

You say you're trying variations, so good luck here. The reaction needs to change though.
I guess Fraud is still in the OP because somewhere deep in my mind, there might still be hope for it or one of its decrepit variants. It's really not a nice card, utterly confusing in multiplayer and often frustrating.

Quote
Reconvert: I think this is just broken? it's so good on estates. remodel is already okay to turn estates into silver, or develop to topdeck them, and this one gives them into your hand. that's so good. I also don't like how the trash effect is just as good as a remodel.
Yes, it's really good on Estates. Putting the card onto your deck or just gaining it normally might fix it. Remodel and Remake are the obvious cousins to this and I didn't want Reconvert to look too weak next to them but I might have overegged the pudding a bit. I think the trash effect is fine, though, because it's mostly worse than Remodel. There has to be something in the trash for it to work.

Quote
Siege: This looks really weak. Even if TfB is present, it also works for your opponent, so you really don't produce resources. And the attack isn't even good. Yea, not feelings this one. I'm pretty sure this is one of the weakest cards in the game.
It IS weak, I agree. I just cling to that card because it's so unique (barring any other fan cards that surely exist somewhere). If I can find something better to do with it or at least one of its effects, or if you have an idea, I'd be happy to try it out.

Quote
Quote
Dominion doesnít have enough Masquerade!
I'll skip this one
Hahaha, I knew you would say that. I read your Dominion card ranking thread ;) But you know what most people think about Masquerade.

Quote
Benefit: Uh, why the penalty? I don't see a reason why it's there. But also, this can lead to some interactions that I'm pretty sure you don't want to have. I play Benefit, you gain an estate. You discard Benefit, now I gain an Estate. I discard Benefit, now you gain an estate? And that's just 2 player. So, I really only see the top part working here.
I like the penalty and I haven't seen it before. I want Benefit's bottom part to interact with its top part. The problem is rather that the total cost of the gains is too low. I'm trying it with a total cost of $7. That might be more appropriate.

Quote
Building Crane: Not seeing it. it's not nearly powerful enough for a one-shot, and the cost reduction... well, I don't think it's enough. A version for 4$ without the reduction would be pretty much strictly better, and I doubt it would be great.
Definitely needs tweaking. One-shots are hard to balance. But I definitely want a card in my set that gets cheaper under certain consitions.

Quote
Demagogue: Let's go through the options
-> empty discard pile: witch with +1 card. crazy good.
-> non-empty discard pile: smithy with... a weird effect. the new cards come into play faster, but the current cards much slower.
This is hard to tweak because the attack is semi-random. It gives your opponent a Curse every other time, so I figured it should draw more cards than Witch. On the other hand, when it top-decks your opponent's discard pile it can be anything from helpful over annoying to devastation, depending much on the engine potential on the board. Playtesting continues...

Quote
Deposit: This looks neat. It does two very different things, which is courtyarding and trashing, and it can even do both at ones. it looks strong, but not overpowered, and pretty unique. I like it a lot.
Yeah, this is one of the cards I'm most proud of. It works very well, is always useful and seems to be correctly priced.

Quote
Juggler: Mh. I'll just read this as a +2 cards, +2$ variant, an effect which, according to Donald (and my intuition), is "strong and uninteresting." The uninteresting part doesn't have to bother you, because this card does a lot an addition. But the powerlevel is questionable. You have more cards, so there's a bigger chance for a curse to be in them. You also have more flexibility. So, it's probably stronger than +2 cards, +2$, which probably means it'll often dominate.

It also has a duration problem. Because you return the curses to the supply, it can just junk forever. And then there's the self-damaging attack thing. You can't defend against this with reaction cards due to their wording, but your opponents can, and then it still attacks you.
Juggler as a Curser is worse than most other Cursers which is why a stronger bonus is in order. Remember, it only gives you +2 Cards and +$2 if you keep a Curse. You're not supposed to "defend" against your own Jugglers. That's also why the persistence of Curses is not a problem but rather a means to balance the card. I find playing with Juggler quite intriguing and fun. Why don't you give it a try ;)

Quote
Beachcomb: Political reaction in 3player. Also, you trash multiple cards at once. And if several people want to use the reaction, is it about who discards it first? do you have to ask everyone? For most reactions, the order doesn't matter.  I don't see a fix for the reaction, there might be one, but as is I'd remove it. It causes too many problems.

I also don't like the top part. I consider it a variant of the "name a card, dig for that card, put it into your hand" effect, which I'm sure a lot of people have considered before. And yea, that's not a good idea. Your version is certainly better, because it resolves faster and isn't as powerful, but I still don't like it, mostly because it's so swingy.

One of the cards from my collection post (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11405.msg395237#msg395237) is:

Quote
c4 - Action - ?
+1 Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or look through your discard pile, and put a card from it into your hand.

which I think is the better way to do this (less swingy), but I even consider this version to be probably not worth doing, which is why it's still in the collection post.
I actually like Beachcomb for all it does. Yet I have to admit that I didn't test it in a 3+ player game and I know there'd be some trouble. I have to find a solution for the multiplayer problem. I don't want Beachcomb to die :O

Quote
Mandate: Another complex card... well, but I don't think we need a Band of Misfits variant... and it's really similar too. Meh.
Again, really hard to balance. Ideally, I'd like Mandate to be fast and simple but also allowing for some high-skilled interaction between Couriers and other cards. Work in progress, basically.

Quote
I couldn't help noticing that the cards seem to be best near the top. the quality progression is sort of like a check mark... is that coincidence? are the top cards better tested?
It's coincidence if by "top" you mean the cheaper cards. Maybe those are just easier to design? Or it's because recently I tend to make some swingy attack cards which are naturally moreexpensive as well as difficult to tweak properly.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: silverspawn on October 27, 2014, 03:42:57 pm
Quote
Thank you a lot for going through my cards! I appreciate it.
that's nice to hear. now upvote my post  :P

Quote
It's coincidence if by "top" you mean the cheaper cards.
I didn't even realize they were ordered by cost <.<
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on January 15, 2015, 07:15:43 pm
Hey guys, time to check out Roots and Renewal again because great changes have been made!

First off, I took out every political effect there has been before. Some cards got permanently kicked out, such as Tenure and Fraud, while others got changed to be both fairer and more interesting. As usual, all current cards are visible in the overview post on page 1. The following is a (poorly written) change log:



Finally, I made some new cards. Check them out!

(http://i.imgur.com/XX6fHHO.png)
Quote
Realm Tax
Types: Treasure
Cost: $3*
If there are at least 3 Action cards in play, this is worth $3. Otherwise, itís worth $1.
This costs $3 + $1 per Action card in play.
There are so many combinations of top and bottom part I can think about for this card but this one currently seems the most intriguing to me. You buy it early when it's cheap but bad and use it later when it's expensive but good. It's a Treasure for engine decks and you might eventually trash it to get some nice benefit. It's so flexible! Buy it! BUY IT!

(http://i.imgur.com/4G6Aoes.png)
Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Choose one: Set aside up to 2 Treasure cards from your hand on your Deposit mat; or +1 Buy and put either 1 or all cards from your Deposit mat into your hand. You may look at the cards on your mat at any time; return them to your deck at the end of the game.
It's your 100% reliable Native Village for Treasures that gives you just what you need at the right time. Even if you never retrieve any Treasures you Deposited, at least you have pseudo-trashed all your yellow junk.

(http://i.imgur.com/HKomtxI.png)
Quote
Market Town
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $4
If you have 5 or more cards in your hand, +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy and +$1. Otherwise, +1 Buy and +$2.
When another player plays an Attack card, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, then at the start of your next turn, draw until you have 5 cards in hand and return this to your hand.
Play it regularly: boring Woodcutter. Play it after using the Reaction (or in an engine): it's a Market which is, like, the best $5-cost card out there! The Reaction looks suspiciously like Horse Traders but it's sufficiently different if you consider twice. Sorry, this card looks so crammed!

(http://i.imgur.com/yB53U9h.png)
Quote
Shire
Types: Victory, Reaction
Cost: $4
Worth 1 VP per empty Supply pile.
When another player gains a card costing from $3 to $6, you may discard this. If you do, gain a copy of that card.
Remember Prefecture? "Worth 1 VP per Province in the Supply"? Weird, inconsistent and anti-Dominion. Forget that! Here's Shire which tries to accomplish a similar thing without negating Provinces and a Smuggler-esque Reaction to spice it up. I hope you like it, it's one of my new favourites.

(http://i.imgur.com/xLTeKHx.png)
Quote
Mediator
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck. For each card revealed, if it is an Action card, +1 Action. Treasure card, take a Coin token. Victory card, +1 VP. Draw one of them and discard the other.
This card wants to get maximum profit out of your deck. It's like Tribute and Ironmonger combined with a great payload and is most effective in mixed decks as it can deal with everything it finds on top of your deck.

I apologize for my moronic parlance. I'm really tired!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: scott_pilgrim on January 15, 2015, 09:41:54 pm
Realm Tax seems like a cool idea, but I think the numbers will need to be adjusted, maybe price it at something like $3+$1 per action ($1 per action will be really cheap too often I think; as is, if it's hard to get, then it's almost always going to be a gold).  But unless you intend for it to count other players' durations, it should specify "action cards you have in play", for both the top and bottom part.

I was thinking Deposit was really weak, but I think the pseudo-trashing aspect of it makes it good.  I assume the "1 or all cards" is to nerf the pseudo-trashing?  It seems really clunky to me, I think it might be better to just say "any cards", and then bump the price up to $4 if necessary.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on January 16, 2015, 12:54:40 am
I like that Money Launderer can be throned now.

I don't like that Reconvert can only gain from the trash. That makes it dead whenever there's no (real) trash-for-benefit or trashing attack on the board. When this is the set's (pseudo) trash-for-benefit card, it shouldn't need another one on the board in order to be useful.

FWIW, I don't think Reparations looks too strong. For about the first half of the game it's just a treasure version of workshop, and usually isn't until very near the end that you get more than one empty pile.

Realm Tax: I agree with scott_pilgrim.

The idea of Deposit looks cool, but I think it'll be weak too often once you've gotten rid of your coppers. I think it's worth testing as-is though.

As you pointed out, Market Town is too crammed full of text. Here's a suggestion to simplify it a little:
Quote
+1 Buy. +$1.
If you have 5 or more cards in hand, +1 Card, +1 Action.
-
When another player plays an Attack card, you may set this aside. If you do, then at the start of your next turn, draw until you have 5 cards in hand and return this to your hand.
I remember seeing a fan card reaction that said "When any player plays an attack", I think that may fit on this card especially if you make it just +$1. This change would have a drawback of making the card a dud on boards with no attacks or handsize increasers, but kingdoms without either of those aren't very common.
PS: Market isn't one of the best $5 cards.

I like Shire from the looks of it, but it bothers me a little that it has two significant advantages over Smugglers (VP and not needing to spend an action to smuggle a card) and only costs $4 over Smugglers' $3. But it's probably fine.

Beachcomb: If you made the reaction 'discard' instead of 'reveal' I think that would make it better:
"When you would trash a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, discard that card instead of trashing it."
I know it hurts the self-synergy you built into it, but I think the card is too strong as-is. If it isn't too strong it would be because it whiffs sometimes (when your discard pile is empty).

...hmmm You have three cards (Beachcomb, Slurry Pit and Draft Horses) that depend on having a discard pile. I wonder if it would help the set to have a sifter like a warehouse variant (Nevermind- you do have Bivouac and Mediator that do a little of that), or maybe a card that lets you leave a couple junk cards in your discard pile on the next reshuffle or a Rabble-style discard-from-deck attack. (A discard-from-deck attack combined with Slurry Pit could be really mean, but then I don't like Slurry Pit much anyway.)
Or maybe Beachcomb and/or Draft Horses could access the Deposit mat...

Royalty looks too nasty. The only thing making the attack weaker than Saboteur is that it can't hit VP cards, but instead of that it has +$2 and it puts any curses and victory cards back on their decks. I hate Saboteur and this looks too similar.

Mediator looks interesting and possibly very cool, but it's hard (for me) to guess how it'll play until I play with it. Some people probably won't like that it's the only card in the set that uses VP tokens and coin tokens, but I see nothing wrong with that.

nice job so far with the expansion. I've already printed several to use at home, but I've only gotten around to using one so far. I've used Suburbia once, and it seemed fine; not really exciting but still cool.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Awaclus on January 16, 2015, 01:00:50 am
I like Deposit. I don't like making it more powerful.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on January 16, 2015, 02:20:14 pm
Realm Tax seems like a cool idea, but I think the numbers will need to be adjusted, maybe price it at something like $3+$1 per action ($1 per action will be really cheap too often I think; as is, if it's hard to get, then it's almost always going to be a gold).  But unless you intend for it to count other players' durations, it should specify "action cards you have in play", for both the top and bottom part.
Realm Tax may well be too cheap although bumping up the cost will hardly make any difference because you'll likely buy it early-game when you only have 1 buy, anyway. But when I tested it with a friend it seemed really strong and gave me a huge advantage because he wasn't using it properly.
As for counting actions, I was thinking that it would be interesting if the card counted other players' durations as well. But I'm afraid people would tend to forget this part and it's such a minor feature that I might as well cut it out.

I was thinking Deposit was really weak, but I think the pseudo-trashing aspect of it makes it good.  I assume the "1 or all cards" is to nerf the pseudo-trashing?  It seems really clunky to me, I think it might be better to just say "any cards", and then bump the price up to $4 if necessary.
I'm not pleased with how bulky the text looks, too. But I felt I had to include the final lines from Native Village. I'm going to playtest it some more with "1 or all cards" before I'll change anything for the exact reason that I felt like the pseudo-trashing needs a nerf.

I don't like that Reconvert can only gain from the trash. That makes it dead whenever there's no (real) trash-for-benefit or trashing attack on the board. When this is the set's (pseudo) trash-for-benefit card, it shouldn't need another one on the board in order to be useful.
I've already changed Reconvert so many times but I just can't get it right. Do you have any suggestions that stick to this concept to make it useful without other tfb cards?

As you pointed out, Market Town is too crammed full of text. Here's a suggestion to simplify it a little:
Quote
+1 Buy. +$1. If you have 5 or more cards in hand, +1 Card, +1 Action.
When another player plays an Attack card, you may set this aside. If you do, then at the start of your next turn, draw until you have 5 cards in hand and return this to your hand.
I remember seeing a fan card reaction that said "When any player plays an attack", I think that may fit on this card especially if you make it just +$1. This change would have a drawback of making the card a dud on boards with no attacks or handsize increasers, but kingdoms without either of those aren't very common.
I'm not convinced. I don't like it reacting to your own attacks, especially not if it just was a Herbalist when it whiffs. For some time now I have been considering introducing the phrase "set it aside until next turn" as a fixed term for "set it aside; if you do, then at the beginning of your next turn, put it into your hand". This would make some of my cards significantly shorter. What are your opinions about this?

PS: Market isn't one of the best $5 cards.
Dude, I was, like, totally joking there ;)

I like Shire from the looks of it, but it bothers me a little that it has two significant advantages over Smugglers (VP and not needing to spend an action to smuggle a card) and only costs $4 over Smugglers' $3. But it's probably fine.
It should be fine, I think. It has some disadvantages compared to Smugglers; whilst the latter gives you a choice which of the cards the player to your right gained last turn you gain, Shire has to be in your hand the moment they gain it and you have to make the decision whether to reveal and discard it the moment they gain it. And Shire cannot be Throned.

Beachcomb: If you made the reaction 'discard' instead of 'reveal' I think that would make it better:
"When you would trash a card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, discard that card instead of trashing it."
I know it hurts the self-synergy you built into it, but I think the card is too strong as-is. If it isn't too strong it would be because it whiffs sometimes (when your discard pile is empty).
Beachcomb started out at $6 and that was just too expensive for a Lab variant that whiffs after a reshuffle (which is actually terrible for engines). I didn't get to playtest the card and use its reaction too often, yet, but I was kinda hoping it would balance itself out. I'd be glad if you helped me playtest :)

Mediator looks interesting and possibly very cool, but it's hard (for me) to guess how it'll play until I play with it. Some people probably won't like that it's the only card in the set that uses VP tokens and coin tokens, but I see nothing wrong with that.
I love Mediator. I have no problem using elements from other sets as this is my fan card expansion and an homage to several concepts the original sets introduced. And I love the fact that I found way to fuse two of them into a beautiful card that can handle any deck except pure action-decks. Try it in a mixed deck, it works well ;)
PS: One far less fruitful attempt to combine two concepts is Siege. It just doesn't turn out the way I would like it to.

nice job so far with the expansion. I've already printed several to use at home, but I've only gotten around to using one so far. I've used Suburbia once, and it seemed fine; not really exciting but still cool.
That's great to hear! If you want exciting cards, I suggest you test Mediator, Sentinel, Benefit or Building Crane. Sentinel is probably the "best" card I made. I don't want to brag but it just works so well^^
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on January 29, 2015, 07:12:54 pm
I tweaked some cards again. Just going over the changes quickly:

I'm just gonna leave this as it is for now. Both cards haven't been tested at all so I'm looking forward to your opinions and experiences!

Peace!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on January 30, 2015, 10:58:39 am
While i don't particularly mind Mediator, i would like you to note that it does nothing to end the game. Bishop and Goons do it very clearly, while Monument just becomes a pretty bad card if you ignore the part that helps end the game (the +$2). The problem of +VP cards is that you might want to play them indefinitely, and that's nothing we want (though Fortress/Bishop is now a case where you actually can have that situation).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: ConMan on February 01, 2015, 05:43:33 pm
While i don't particularly mind Mediator, i would like you to note that it does nothing to end the game. Bishop and Goons do it very clearly, while Monument just becomes a pretty bad card if you ignore the part that helps end the game (the +$2). The problem of +VP cards is that you might want to play them indefinitely, and that's nothing we want (though Fortress/Bishop is now a case where you actually can have that situation).
And Goons with Trader and an empty Silver pile, but that's obviously much harder to set up.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on February 15, 2015, 09:27:55 pm
I'd suggest making the returning of cards on Blackmail optional (hope nobody said this, yet). As is, it becomes a dead card if all you have in hand are good cards. Unlike Ambassador, it gives a bonus, so you might want to enable players to play it for that, even if they don't want to attack.

Also i like Building Crane. It's a very clever idea.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 15, 2015, 10:52:06 pm
While i don't particularly mind Mediator, i would like you to note that it does nothing to end the game. Bishop and Goons do it very clearly, while Monument just becomes a pretty bad card if you ignore the part that helps end the game (the +$2). The problem of +VP cards is that you might want to play them indefinitely, and that's nothing we want (though Fortress/Bishop is now a case where you actually can have that situation).
And Goons with Trader and an empty Silver pile, but that's obviously much harder to set up.

(http://i.imgur.com/xLTeKHx.png)

I was thinking about that for some time and I can just assume that prolonging the game with Mediator would be difficult and need quite a few Victory cards in your deck to gain several VP each turn. But this increases your chances of stalling (like, if Mediator reveals two Victory cards). Also, Mediator provides coin tokens which promote buying cards. I've only played one game with Mediator so far where it wasn't a problem but of course it needs more testing. I was happy with its balance, though.

I'd suggest making the returning of cards on Blackmail optional (hope nobody said this, yet). As is, it becomes a dead card if all you have in hand are good cards. Unlike Ambassador, it gives a bonus, so you might want to enable players to play it for that, even if they don't want to attack.

I has been suggested before but I found that Blackmail is a pretty strong attack. In the early game, it might hurt your opponent as much as Militia or Cutpurse, although they have a choice which can be considered a weak point. I kept the returning on Blackmail mandatory to nerf it but if it turns out nobody plays it in the endgame anymore, I might make it optional.

Also i like Building Crane. It's a very clever idea.

Thank you :) I'm not quite happy with its power, yet. During playtests, I often felt like I wasted money on Building Cranes when I didn't play enough of them in one turn or didn't get enough money or buys to get them back AND other cards that actually improve my economy. In boards without +buy or gains, it's most likely a waste of money. So I'm thinking about buffing it to "+4 Cards, +1 Action." That might be reasonable.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 16, 2015, 05:54:38 pm
I updated a few cards. The old versions are on the left and the new ones on the right.

(http://i.imgur.com/4G6Aoes.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/1jFGVls.png)

Old Deposit seems a little weak and lackluster so I decided to give it some insane option to play. I have no idea if this is at all balanced. It can produce a vast megaturn but it could also turn out very badly for you. With a flawless engine, it would probably be too good... I'm not sure.

(http://i.imgur.com/ymOUvhE.png)

Reconvert costs $4 for now. It seemed too weak at $5 but might be a touch too strong at $4. We'll see.

(http://i.imgur.com/gqjP2n9.png)

Market Town does other stuff as an Action now. It's easier to read and should play out differently from comparable cards (i. e. Woodcutter and Market).

(http://i.imgur.com/uJN5dRk.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/euEn3nl.png)

I play-tested the left version with two friends and it was the horror. Royalty was so powerful it could completely obliterate other player's engines and leave only green cards. They hated it and I realised it's un-fun and unreliable. The new version has freshly emerged from the steaming think tank and is ready to be gain you some stuff and be only mildly annoying for other players. Isn't that nice?

(http://i.imgur.com/Ajt2don.png)

The degradation of Royalty gave way to a new attack that is so brutal that I get dizzy looking at it. Maybe this is way too much... but I'd like to explore the extremes. I'm ready to dismiss them if they turn out to be eldritch horrors.
Siege is the result of two concepts fused into one. When it turned out a cheap non-terminal duration discard attack is nothing more than annoying and game-slowing, I knew this kind of attack needed to be much more expensive and proportionately strong, and there should be some bonus for the attacking player as well. I decided to give the attacker an incentive to play the card as little as possible and mainly use Siege as a transitional stage on the way to a Province. I haven't tested this at all so the attack might be vastly overpowered.

(http://i.imgur.com/BUn4snk.png)

And finally, I had this idea. I wanted an overpay card because why not? I have utilised many mechanisms specific to other sets to expand their range and I feel this is fairly new. Provisioner wants to play Treasures mid-turn without a buy phase to reduce your hand size. It can either be a Lab or a Smithy. But either of those it can be only once. So It's basically another combo card but also works great on its own in smaller quantities.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on February 16, 2015, 10:59:27 pm
I kinda like the old version of Deposit better, but I'm just looking at them and you've playtested it so maybe the old version isn't as good as it looks? The new version looks weird. It doesn't do anything for you on the turn you play it, but you can easily save up for a big megaturn. Hard to guess how it'll play by looking at it. I liked the flexibility of the old version when you could take as many or as few as you want from your deposit mat (maybe you want to leave most of the coppers there).

re: Reconvert: Instinctively I'd agree with your initial idea that the options would make up for lacking the automatic +action that apprentice has. But again, I'd have to playtest it to tell.

I like this version of Market Town a lot more than the previous one.

This version of Royalty looks okay except when it reveals coppers (or ruins). Discarding coppers doesn't hurt your opponent, but you may have to hurt yourself by gaining a copper if they aren't any $1-2 cost kingdom cards on the board. I think it'd help a lot of you make it affect 'an action or treasure costing more than $0' or maybe costing at least $2 or $3.

I kinda like this version of Siege, but the attack may still be too powerful to be fun if someone gets more than one siege in play (or two players have a siege in play in a 3+ player game). I think it'd be fine if you say 'each player with 5 or more cards in hand' and keep it otherwise the same (or maybe use ghost ship's wording 'each other player gains a ruins and puts cards from their hand onto their deck until they have four cards in hand' -that way they still gain ruins even if they already only have four cards in hand). Putting a card back plus gaining a ruins two turns in a row is still a very strong attack, but that way it shouldn't be too horrible to be fun when there's more than one siege in play. And I like the below the line effect to go with it too.

Provisioner should cost at least $5. Compare it to library, it doesn't have the set aside actions part that library does, but instead it has options before drawing to 7 (including acting like a lab).
I think the below the line part would be better as an on-gain or on-buy effect to set aside a copper for next turn instead of overpay because overpaying by one (usually) doesn't do anything, but as-is you don't have to overpay at all to set aside a copper for next turn. And even setting aside a copper from play for next turn is pretty significant.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: TheOthin on February 16, 2015, 11:08:43 pm
Siege is so much stuff weirdly glued together. It does a hand attack and a junk attack and another hand and junk attack the next turn and then it also lets you upgrade things.

Provisioner looks absurd. From a 5-card hand, it can be +3 Cards, +1 Action, or just +4 Cards. There are advantages and disadvantages to the way it does it but not enough for either of those effects to be treated much different from if they were available directly. Bear in mind that +4 Cards is a $6 effect and +3 Cards, +1 Action is even better.

You compare it to Lab and Smithy, but that's not right at all; it removes itself from your hand so you get an extra card. Consider how Library is Smithy-with-a-bonus. And also bear in mind that even if it only drew to 6 to mime Lab or Smithy, it'd have to cost at least $6, because Lab costs $5. And as it stands it's looking for something much higher.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 17, 2015, 10:21:29 am
I kinda like the old version of Deposit better, but I'm just looking at them and you've playtested it so maybe the old version isn't as good as it looks? The new version looks weird. It doesn't do anything for you on the turn you play it, but you can easily save up for a big megaturn. Hard to guess how it'll play by looking at it. I liked the flexibility of the old version when you could take as many or as few as you want from your deposit mat (maybe you want to leave most of the coppers there).

Notice that new Deposit allows you to set aside up to 2 Treasures if you don't trash it. So the choice is almost the same as before but I gave it more oomph because it felt like Deposit needed it but you gotta trash it to do the trick. Might be under-priced, although it's actually quite weak  as long as you use it to pseudo-trash Coppers.

I like this version of Market Town a lot more than the previous one.

Thanks! Vanilla bonuses in the same line still isn't the best stylistic choice but I prefer it to a tiny font. It doesn't look that crammed any more. Anyway, I need to find a better programme to design the cards.

This version of Royalty looks okay except when it reveals coppers (or ruins). Discarding coppers doesn't hurt your opponent, but you may have to hurt yourself by gaining a copper if they aren't any $1-2 cost kingdom cards on the board. I think it'd help a lot of you make it affect 'an action or treasure costing more than $0' or maybe costing at least $2 or $3.

Good idea. I might do that if it turns out that Remodelling without trashing but based on a lucky attack isn't as strong as I think it might be.

I kinda like this version of Siege, but the attack may still be too powerful to be fun if someone gets more than one siege in play (or two players have a siege in play in a 3+ player game). I think it'd be fine if you say 'each player with 5 or more cards in hand' and keep it otherwise the same (or maybe use ghost ship's wording 'each other player gains a ruins and puts cards from their hand onto their deck until they have four cards in hand' -that way they still gain ruins even if they already only have four cards in hand). Putting a card back plus gaining a ruins two turns in a row is still a very strong attack, but that way it shouldn't be too horrible to be fun when there's more than one siege in play. And I like the below the line effect to go with it too.

You're probably right. It would be the best solution if Siege always gets you down to 4 cards and no less. The Ruins shouldn't matter so much, as they're going to come in late and sporadically due to Siege's high cost.

Siege is so much stuff weirdly glued together. It does a hand attack and a junk attack and another hand and junk attack the next turn and then it also lets you upgrade things.

As I mentioned above, the upgrading option serves as an incentive to trash it and gain a Province instead of playing Siege over and over. Anyway, I like cards that do a lot of stuff. I leave the easy cards to LastFootnote, he's very good at coming up with cute ideas, and we don't get in the way of each other ;)
(Just to be very clear, I admire his ideas. The last sentence should not be read as if I was making fun of them.)


Provisioner should cost at least $5. Compare it to library, it doesn't have the set aside actions part that library does, but instead it has options before drawing to 7 (including acting like a lab).
I think the below the line part would be better as an on-gain or on-buy effect to set aside a copper for next turn instead of overpay because overpaying by one (usually) doesn't do anything, but as-is you don't have to overpay at all to set aside a copper for next turn. And even setting aside a copper from play for next turn is pretty significant.

Provisioner looks absurd. From a 5-card hand, it can be +3 Cards, +1 Action, or just +4 Cards. There are advantages and disadvantages to the way it does it but not enough for either of those effects to be treated much different from if they were available directly. Bear in mind that +4 Cards is a $6 effect and +3 Cards, +1 Action is even better.

You compare it to Lab and Smithy, but that's not right at all; it removes itself from your hand so you get an extra card. Consider how Library is Smithy-with-a-bonus. And also bear in mind that even if it only drew to 6 to mime Lab or Smithy, it'd have to cost at least $6, because Lab costs $5. And as it stands it's looking for something much higher.

I messed up there. Of course Provisioner should cost $5 and still only draw up to 6 cards in hand. Even then I wouldn't be pleased with how the second Provisioner in your hand would feel after you played the first one. The card probably needs more options... or other options. What was I even thinking?
It's also bad that I didn't notice that my overpay idea essentially means "When you buy this, play a Copper you have in play next turn" - of course that's huge, and doesn't require overpay. I might either change it to LibraryAdventurer's suggestion or think of some other overpay mechanism.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 17, 2015, 12:03:54 pm
Siege is so much stuff weirdly glued together. It does a hand attack and a junk attack and another hand and junk attack the next turn and then it also lets you upgrade things.

As I mentioned above, the upgrading option serves as an incentive to trash it and gain a Province instead of playing Siege over and over. Anyway, I like cards that do a lot of stuff. I leave the easy cards to LastFootnote, he's very good at coming up with cute ideas, and we don't get in the way of each other ;)
(Just to be very clear, I admire his ideas. The last sentence should not be read as if I was making fun of them.)

Look at it this way. If you split Siege into two cards, you get two better cards almost for free! I like Siege's duration effect, but I'd rather see:

Quote
????
Types: Action - Duration
Cost: $5
Now and at the start of your next turn, +$1.

While this is in play, when you buy a card, you may trash a non-Duration card from play and gain a card costing exactly $1 more than the trashed card.

The non-Duration bit is so that you can't trash a Duration that still has stuff to do on a future turn. There's nothing to track that.


Deposit has a bunch of unnecessary words. You're not setting the cards aside face down, so you don't have to say that you may look at them at any time. You also don't have to specify that they return to your deck at the end. I know Native Village does, but it doesn't need to either and the more words you can cut the better. Also because they're set aside face up, you don't need to reveal them first; they're public knowledge at that point. So:

Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $3
You may trash this. If you do, +1 Buy and play each card from your Deposit mat twice in any order. Otherwise, set aside up to 2 Treasure cards from your hand on your mat.

OK, now that we've got wording out of the way, I think the card is probably weak. I'd try it without the one-shot, always give the +1 Buy, and let you play any number of cards from the mat. So:

Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Buy. Choose one: Set aside a Treasure card from your hand onto your Deposit mat; or play any number of cards from your mat twice each.

OR:

Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Buy. Choose one: Set aside any number of Treasure cards from your hand onto your Deposit mat; or play a card from your mat twice.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 17, 2015, 03:14:15 pm
Look at it this way. If you split Siege into two cards, you get two better cards almost for free! I like Siege's duration effect

By Duration effect do you mean the Attack itself or the ability to upgrade?

Quote
????
Types: Action - Duration
Cost: $5
Now and at the start of your next turn, +$1.

While this is in play, when you buy a card, you may trash a non-Duration card from play and gain a card costing exactly $1 more than the trashed card.

The non-Duration bit is so that you can't trash a Duration that still has stuff to do on a future turn. There's nothing to track that.

Good thing you mentioned the tracking problem with Duration cards being trashed during the turn in which they've been played! I need to include that condition.
I already tried Siege as a card that purely attacks, either as a cantrip or just with +1 Action but with no other benefits and that was awful. And I didn't want any ordinary vanilla bonuses either because I already have plenty of them on other cards. I wanted something unique. Anyway, as a Duration card with a benefit for the attacker, Siege becomes so strong (even without the Ruins) that it had to cost $6 or $7. That's why it does both of these things. The card you suggested is good but it doesn't solve Siege's power problem.

Deposit has a bunch of unnecessary words. You're not setting the cards aside face down, so you don't have to say that you may look at them at any time. You also don't have to specify that they return to your deck at the end. I know Native Village does, but it doesn't need to either and the more words you can cut the better. Also because they're set aside face up, you don't need to reveal them first; they're public knowledge at that point.

This is an issue because I actually meant for the Treasures to be set aside face down, I just forgot to put it in the text. Otherwise, your opponents would have the right to look through your Deposit mat cards at any time and that's not what I want. Although you need to reveal the Treasures to make sure they're not other cards you set aside.
Are you saying Native Village doesn't need to tell you to return the set aside cards to your deck at the end of the game or Deposit doesn't need to? I assume if an original card needs this clause, mine needs it, too. On the other hand I could just not care what official cards say because this will probably never be a cause for concern in reality.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 17, 2015, 03:29:21 pm
I like Siege's duration effect

By Duration effect do you mean the Attack itself or the ability to upgrade?

I meant the ability to upgrade. The Attack doesn't thrill me and it's a bit tough to track whether it's been blocked with Moat or Lighthouse, since the Moat or Lighthouse has been shuffled into the target's deck by the time the attack hits the second time.

Deposit has a bunch of unnecessary words. You're not setting the cards aside face down, so you don't have to say that you may look at them at any time. You also don't have to specify that they return to your deck at the end. I know Native Village does, but it doesn't need to either and the more words you can cut the better. Also because they're set aside face up, you don't need to reveal them first; they're public knowledge at that point.

This is an issue because I actually meant for the Treasures to be set aside face down, I just forgot to put it in the text. Otherwise, your opponents would have the right to look through your Deposit mat cards at any time and that's not what I want. Although you need to reveal the Treasures to make sure they're not other cards you set aside.
Are you saying Native Village doesn't need to tell you to return the set aside cards to your deck at the end of the game or Deposit doesn't need to? I assume if an original card needs this clause, mine needs it, too. On the other hand I could just not care what official cards say because this will probably never be a cause for concern in reality.

Neither Native Village nor Deposit needs the "return them to your deck at the end of the game" clause. It's in the rules that set-aside cards go back to your deck at the end of the game.

Why have the cards face down? The other players already know what they are, and I seriously doubt that knowledge is going to generate AP. I don't think a lot of time is going to be eaten up with players examining other players' Deposit mats. And of course it's fewer words to just set them aside face up (the default). I am struggling to come up with a good reason that they should be face down.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 17, 2015, 03:42:35 pm
Yeah, you know what - you're right ;) As much as I like cards that do a lot of stuff. I still want to keep them nice and concise. You have made several good suggestions for Deposit. Now I need to evaluate each option.

Are there any cards in my set so far that appear to be "optimal" in what they do and how it is expressed through the card text? Cards that probably don't need change at all? I currently consider maybe 5 or 6 cards "finished" but I'd like to hear unbiased opinions on that.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on February 17, 2015, 03:55:48 pm
To make a Duration - Attack trackable, you could let players set aside something:

Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand sets one card from it aside and gains a Ruins. If he did set a card aside, after he draws cards during his next cleanup phase, he discards the set-aside card, discards a card from his hand, and gains a Ruins.

Of course this isn't pretty. It becomes even more horrible if you try to make it topdeck the card (i went with discarding), as that would remove the card that tracks the attack. Tracking over Ruins could be possibly unfair (if only some players got one), unreliable ("if you do" is needed) and still untrackable because of Watchtower.

I'm pretty sure this isn't novel enough to excuse the wall of text a clean implementation demands.

Edit: Or you could use tokens. Which is also bad, unless they have an ongoing purpose.
"Each other player sets aside a VP token. If he doesn't buy a card during his next turn, he takes it".
Oh wait, this isn't an attack... It's bribery. Never mind.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 17, 2015, 04:08:28 pm
Or it could say "Now and at the start of your next turn, when this is in play...", dealing with the trashing issue. This is especially important with Builder in the Kingdom.

(http://i.imgur.com/Ou8CgmF.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/yO3yJYk.png)

I have thought about Moat and Lighthouse before and I assumed "the attack doesn't affect you" ceases to apply at the end of your turn, or when Lighthouse is discarded from play, respectively. If that's not the case, that would make it even more complicated. But since there are no official Duration Attack cards, there are no rules for it either, are there? If I can make up the rule, I'd say Moat and Lighthouse only block during the turn they're revealed or in play, respectively.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on February 17, 2015, 04:17:54 pm
Or it could say "Now and at the start of your next turn, when this is in play...", dealing with the trashing issue. This is especially important with Builder in the Kingdom.

(http://i.imgur.com/Ou8CgmF.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/yO3yJYk.png)

I have thought about Moat and Lighthouse before and I assumed "the attack doesn't affect you" ceases to apply at the end of your turn, or when Lighthouse is discarded from play, respectively. If that's not the case, that would make it even more complicated. But since there are no official Duration Attack cards, there are no rules for it either, are there? If I can make up the rule, I'd say Moat and Lighthouse only block during the turn they're revealed or in play, respectively.

Most of us probably thought that at some point, but that's a misconception. All a Duration card does next turn is part of its "on play" effect. If somebody reveals Moat to it, he's unaffected by the entire card, not only the part that happens now.

A reason why you thought it might be that the german Seaside edition places "next turn" effects under a line.

Edit: Ah, nonsense, of course you know how the original durations look like... Forget that part. What was i thinking?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 17, 2015, 04:40:33 pm
Are there any cards in my set so far that appear to be "optimal" in what they do and how it is expressed through the card text? Cards that probably don't need change at all? I currently consider maybe 5 or 6 cards "finished" but I'd like to hear unbiased opinions on that.

Realm Tax looks good. I like the card and its wording. I would have the cost be "?*" instead of "0*", but that's it.

Bivouac's wording is fine. I would still take out the part that allows you to topdeck it.

Money Launderer's wording is fine. I would either remove the "Copper costs $1 more this turn" or make it a "while in play" under a dividing line.

Poacher could maybe say, "For each Poacher discarded". Forest Hut's wording is fine, but neither Poacher nor Forest Hut thrill me.

Salesman's wording is fine and the on-play effect seems solid. The setup seems an unnecessary complication, but I get how it's supposed to work with the cost reduction.

Builder and Battlement are fine wording-wise. Battlement seems like it's going to run out piles way too fast. Also the on-trash bit is maybe a little confusing in a "I'm not sure I'm reading this right" kind of way, even though it's straightforward.

Draft horses should probably say "reveal up to 3 Action cards from your discard pile and hand". Anyway, it's a bit too similar to Scavenger in my mind.

Suburbia's wording is fine. Again, I've tried the bottom part on some cards and found it to be not much fun, but maybe you'll have better luck with it.

Blackmail's wording is fine, but I don't find it to be sufficiently different from Ambassador.

I think Bog Village is too much rigmarole. I like that trashing from the Supply is one option and the other one potentially gets you money, but it's too much confusing work to get that money.

I think Market Town's reaction is too similar to Horse Traders. Yes it works differently, but you're still reacting to draw cards. The top is unexciting, but hey it's the top of a Reaction. It doesn't have to be exciting. Obviously I would prefer that it didn't have 3 vanilla bonuses side by side, but how bad is that really?

It's hard to say how balanced Reconvert is, but it could probably be cheaper.

As for Royalty, I think putting an arbitrary number of cards back on your deck is a recipe for AP. Also holy crap you're gaining a lot of cards in a game with 4 or 5 players. Jester is like this too, but usually Jester isn't gaining you a card per other player.

As I've said elsewhere, I'm not super-stoked about Victory cards like Shire that usually cap out at 3 VP. The reaction is potentially game-slowing since each other player has to pause whenever they gain a card in the cost range. Though maybe the cost range itself mostly solves that problem. Tough to say.

Slurry Pit is too much like Masquerade to really interest me.

Beachcomb seems situationally quite strong. Maybe it makes me too sad when my discard pile is empty, dunno. The reaction seems like a fairly classic thing, though again situational.

Benefit seems neat. I'd take out the Estate gaining. Other than that it seems quite interesting.

Building Crane is cool. Not sure it's balanced, but probably worth testing as-is. I strongly advise changing the wording to, "+3 Cards. +1 Action. Return this to the Supply. Building Cranes cost $1 less this turn (but not less than $0)." The other interactions with Ambassador and the cards in this set don't seem worth it. But even if you do keep it, you should say "Building Cranes" or "copies of Building Cranes" instead of "this".

Holy cow you have a lot of cards. I didn't realize before starting this. OK, moving on.

Demagogue seems often helpful to other players if only one is played.

Juggler seems a bit messy and a bit similar to Mountebank. I guess I'd have to play it to see if I liked it.

Tough to say whether Mediator provides much that Tribute doesn't. Although it does reward you for Victory hybrid cards rather than penalizing them, so it's got that going for it. You should say "Put one of them into your hand" rather than "Draw one of them". Envoy says to "draw" cards that are revealed, but that's an error.

Reparations seems pleasantly simple. Not sure if it's fun to play, but it's worth a shot.

Sentinel seems worth trying.

Bastion seems good.

It's hard to judge Mandate on its own, and I'm not fond of Courier. Too similar to Band of Misfits, and "an Action card other than Mandate from the Supply costing up to $4 that you choose" is a mouthful.

I've already talked about Siege and Deposit today.

Almost all of your cards are worded excellently. I would use "he" and "his" rather than "they" and "their" just to be consistent with the published cards, but I can understand why you'd want to keep it gender neutral. I don't think it's going to cause confusion here.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 17, 2015, 05:16:06 pm
Thank you very much for your opinion! I will take all your statements into account. I'm just going to reply to some of them where I feel it's important.

Realm Tax looks good. I like the card and its wording. I would have the cost be "?*" instead of "0*", but that's it.
It just crossed my mind that it might be a problem that Realm Tax's bottom line addresses "you" while just sitting in the Supply. So whose player's Action cards in play do get counted? Obviously it's supposed to be those of the active player but it doesn't say that. So it might go back to counting all Action cards in play as it originally said on the card. But that seems so counter-intuitive. Hmmm...
Anyway, I chose "0*" to avoid any cases where Real Tax cannot be clearly assigned a specific cost. In that case, it's $0. But such a case is probably impossible...

Money Launderer's wording is fine. I would either remove the "Copper costs $1 more this turn" or make it a "while in play" under a dividing line.
I originally had it say "while in play" but I changed it and some people were happy with it. I assume Money Launderer's Copper-cost line won't be worth exploiting in the majority of games. But when there's TR/KC and ML and TfB available - I want you to be able to reap those juicy benefits. I know DXV regretted that he didn't have Coppersmith say "While this is in play, Copper produces $1 more" but I don't care^^ The ML + TfB combo is meant to be exploited!

Juggler seems a bit messy and a bit similar to Mountebank. I guess I'd have to play it to see if I liked it.
Please go ahead and play with the Juggler :) It's one of the oldest and most well play-tested cards in the set, and the tricky decisions involved are worth the wall of text. Juggler rewards deliberate gameplay on both sides of the attack.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 19, 2015, 10:06:57 am
Hello, this time I'm announcing a BIG update. Thanks to the help and advise from LastFootnote I was able to recreate all my cards with templates using GIMP (except for Forest Hut, for which I don't have a template). I also tweaked the wording of several cards and took your comments into consideration.
The most notable differences are:
Furthermore, I'm trying to come up with alternative mechanisms for Bivouac or Suburbia or both, especially considering their bottom parts. They are too similar.

And here are the cards in a cohesive display and their new glorious beauty for you to enjoy, haha.

(http://i.imgur.com/nQAExT9.png?2) (http://i.imgur.com/hS3IVg2.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/rgDZXq8.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/6crTuLa.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/eXa1wJh.png) (http://i.imgur.com/WeXTkTj.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/sGlT0kc.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/ZF6Ivnn.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/V3fSOGe.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/Iw6aFwD.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/AAFCHa4.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/XFMUMQu.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/G9sh72F.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/DiCEb9u.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/5yq1zuA.png?2) (http://i.imgur.com/7kN8TGB.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/Dz4BIeL.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/WWTnP3F.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/eqVXuPn.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/FZIJcin.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/Ylrwhb1.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/gxIgjrd.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/mRZNnwe.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/OWO6zio.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/DaqjweV.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/CwcAMSC.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/PKVKDBM.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/Y2m7xVW.png?1) (http://i.imgur.com/CYdDuql.png?1)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Jack Rudd on February 19, 2015, 10:21:14 am
If I'm reading it correctly, I can King's Court a Salesman and then empty the entire pile of Grand Markets. Is that right?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 19, 2015, 10:50:54 am
If I'm reading it correctly, I can King's Court a Salesman and then empty the entire pile of Grand Markets. Is that right?

If Grand Market was the pile added by Salesman's setup clause, then yes.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 19, 2015, 10:51:04 am
If I'm reading it correctly, I can King's Court a Salesman and then empty the entire pile of Grand Markets. Is that right?

That's a good note. Maybe it should say "while this is in play" instead of "this turn". You could still potentially gain a lot of cards from the extra Kingdom pile with a lot of money or if you played multiple Salesmen. Is that okay or overpowered? It's not easy to do but Salesman might be too strong on some boards. Or he should be more expensive.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: TheOthin on February 19, 2015, 10:52:29 am
Cost reducers combined with on-buy +Buy is pretty much a recipe for that kind of situation. I'd be wary of sticking the two on one card in any form.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 19, 2015, 11:03:52 am
I had a quick idea. What if I were to take the top part of Salesman and the bottom part of Siege, changed them a little and put them together to get something like this:

Quote
Salesiege
$4?
Action
Choose a Supply card pile. Cards from that pile cost $1 or $2 more this turn, your choice.
While this is in play, when you buy a card, you may trash a card you have in play and gain a card costing exactly $1 more.

It could even be a Duration card with some effect for next turn so the cost increase actually affects other players as well.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 24, 2015, 03:29:40 pm
For Battlement, how about, "When you trash this during another player's turn, that player trashes an Attack card he has in play". Also, that's super harsh. Maybe he could gain a Silver or something to replace it?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 24, 2015, 03:58:59 pm
For Battlement, how about, "When you trash this during another player's turn, that player trashes an Attack card he has in play". Also, that's super harsh. Maybe he could gain a Silver or something to replace it?

Well, I didn't playtest it enough. I would really like to see some other people's reaction to Battlement's on-trash effect when it is actually triggered against them. I like to think that those attacks that trash Battlement are quite harsh themselves (after all, they're trashing attacks) and there's only a handful of them. If it turns out to be too harsh, heck okay, you can have a consolidation Silver.

"When you trash this during another player's turn, that player trashes an Attack card he has in play" - The part in italics I deliberately omitted so Battlement can be used to trash Sieges other players have in play. However, if I dismiss Siege as a card idea, there would be no attack cards that could be in play during another player's turn so the rephrasing isn't necessary.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 25, 2015, 09:00:52 am
This is my new version of Provisioner. No more wonky choices that don't make sense or needless complication. After a couple of non-human-interactive test games it seems solid. It's a pretty strong BM enabler and okay for engines with treasures as payload. It doesn't like other engines very much, and greening, and slogs, and junking, and Copper trashing... :P

(http://i.imgur.com/movtAty.png?1)

You will also notice that on a board with Provisioner, a 5/2 opening is much better than a 2/5.

Thoughts, ideas, complaints? :)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on February 25, 2015, 09:56:03 am
I don't think it needs the on-gain at all.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 25, 2015, 10:04:14 am
I don't think it needs the on-gain at all.

No but I like it :D It fits the top thematically and it's a nice bonus. It makes a 5/3 opening possible.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 02, 2015, 01:58:29 pm
I have removed Slurry Pit from the set because it doesn't intrigue me any more and also it whiffs too often. I also removed Bivouac because doing stuff upon revealing is too confusing in certain situations.

(http://i.imgur.com/bwAYJUo.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/hS3IVg2.png?1)

I think trashing from the discard pile could be a nice on-gain or on-buy effect so you can trigger it exactly when the time is right. So I would like to try overpay. Also, I need a new village but the top part of Bivouac it too boring to recycle. I eventually came up with this card that fulfils my requirements and does some more stuff:

(http://i.imgur.com/ENqlZ1U.png?1)

Quote
Robber Knight
$3
Action/Looter
+2 Actions. Gain a Gold and a Ruins.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpaid, you may look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.

I only did one test game with Robber Knight where it wasn't bought because it was outclassed by Mining Village and Conspirator. What are your first impressions on that card? Is the cost accurate? Would you buy it or, rather, when would you buy it?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 02, 2015, 02:14:31 pm
Without thinking about it too much, I like Robber Knight. It's got a lot going on, but it's not too wordy and I think the effects are cool.

EDIT: Oh! Except I think the overpay should be mandatory. But that's just my opinion.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 02, 2015, 03:01:40 pm
Without thinking about it too much, I like Robber Knight. It's got a lot going on, but it's not too wordy and I think the effects are cool.

EDIT: Oh! Except I think the overpay should be mandatory. But that's just my opinion.

That's great to hear :) I have thought about mandatory trashing but that could really screw you over if you don't pay attention to your deck. But Herald is mandatory as well and I assume DXV would say "you should really know what's in your discard pile, seriously." I will test mandatory with priority.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on March 02, 2015, 03:17:25 pm
When i first looked at Robber Knight, i didn't like it. On second thought, it has something to it, even though the parts seem contradictory at first. Hey, you can use your spare action to play that Ruins you got. Either way, i'd say i'm a bit in favour for making the trashing optional, for the "screw yourself over" thing exactly.

Nice expansion symbol you got there, by the way.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 02, 2015, 03:20:47 pm
When i first looked at Robber Knight, i didn't like it. On second thought, it has something to it, even though the parts seem contradictory at first. Hey, you can use your spare action to play that Ruins you got.

Yeah, that's part of what I like about it. +2 Actions to play the Ruins you're gaining.

I think the biggest strike against the card is that it's overpay for trashing, which is basically the same concept as Doctor. It's different than Doctor, though, and maybe it'll play differently enough.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 02, 2015, 03:42:18 pm
Nice expansion symbol you got there, by the way.

Finally someone notices :D

Of course I thought about Doctor. You buy Doctor solely for the trashing and you can trash a little bit on-buy. You can buy Robber Knight just for the trashing but it does other stuff for you. The trashing is a one-time thing only so if trashing is your main goal, you should aim to make this overpay as big as possible which sets it apart from Doctor. You can trash the Ruins you previously gained Ruins, too, which is cute.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: TheOthin on March 02, 2015, 05:30:24 pm
Yeah, it's an interesting contrast that Doctor's on-play effect cleans up your deck like its overpay trashing while Robber Knight's on-play does the opposite. Of course, with non-terminal Ruins gaining, it could be possible to rapidly thin the Ruins pile and make it gain free Golds on play... I don't know how much of an issue that could be.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Thanar on March 02, 2015, 11:18:47 pm
Is it possible for you to post your latest versions of cards in this set at full resolution (either together as a zip file or with clickable images as in Asper's thread)? I'd like to print out a full set for playtesting.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 03, 2015, 08:29:19 am
Is it possible for you to post your latest versions of cards in this set at full resolution (either together as a zip file or with clickable images as in Asper's thread)? I'd like to print out a full set for playtesting.

It is definitely possbile and I will be happy to provide them to you :) I wanted to make clickable images like Asper did but I don't know how. I also don't know how to upload a zip file here so I would be glad if you told me how to do one of the two ;)

Just a little warning: some cards have hardly been tested at all, and some are likely to be changed as soon as I can come up with something better. E.g. Siege might not be implemented as-is, it really needs testing. Salesman will be dropped, as Jack Rudd pointed out a flaw with it that could brake the game balance...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Asper on March 03, 2015, 09:36:27 am
Is it possible for you to post your latest versions of cards in this set at full resolution (either together as a zip file or with clickable images as in Asper's thread)? I'd like to print out a full set for playtesting.

It is definitely possbile and I will be happy to provide them to you :) I wanted to make clickable images like Asper did but I don't know how. I also don't know how to upload a zip file here so I would be glad if you told me how to do one of the two ;)

Just a little warning: some cards have hardly been tested at all, and some are likely to be changed as soon as I can come up with something better. E.g. Siege might not be implemented as-is, it really needs testing. Salesman will be dropped, as Jack Rudd pointed out a flaw with it that could brake the game balance...

I didn't really do anything special. I uploaded a pretty big version of the card image and made it a bit smaller by writing widht=260 inside the image tag. I would claim it's an intended feature, but it's basically me being too lazy to scale down whenever i export an image...

Quote me to see how the tag looks here:  (http://)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 03, 2015, 10:28:41 am
I think that's a clever idea since it makes it possible for other people to view and download your images at full size and otherwise save space. I'm not sure this is significantly less work than resizing the images on upload, though^^
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 03, 2015, 11:15:47 am
I think that's a clever idea since it makes it possible for other people to view and download your images at full size and otherwise save space. I'm not sure this is significantly less work than resizing the images on upload, though^^

I agree that it's no less work than uploading a smaller version, but I think I will also do this from now on.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 03, 2015, 11:26:41 am
It looks like the old images (including Forest hut) have disappeared. Are you planning to update the OP with the new images?

By the way, I think the word you're looking for is "Suburb", not "Suburbia". "Suburb" means "a district lying immediately outside a city or town, especially a smaller residential community". "Suburbia" refers to the concept of suburbs, or to all suburbs collectively.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: TheOthin on March 03, 2015, 12:09:23 pm
Just be careful not to call it Sburb.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set BETA)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 03, 2015, 12:56:05 pm
It looks like the old images (including Forest hut) have disappeared. Are you planning to update the OP with the new images?

By the way, I think the word you're looking for is "Suburb", not "Suburbia". "Suburb" means "a district lying immediately outside a city or town, especially a smaller residential community". "Suburbia" refers to the concept of suburbs, or to all suburbs collectively.

They disappeared temporarily because I deleted and replaced them with the new, awesome images I made with the templates! The whole OP is updated and contains clickable images now so you can download them in original size.

Thanks for the hint with Suburbia. I liked the name and I guess I could have gotten away with it. Yet, I changed it to Suburb in a sudden fit of concession.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 04, 2015, 08:06:58 pm
Hey, I just did the first playtest for Robber Knight and... it's pretty insane. The Ruins aren't nearly a harsh enough penalty for the easy Golds you gain. I want to keep Robber Knight cheap, though, so you can decently overpay for it. So I'm just gonna throw out a few ideas to nerf the card. What do you think about them? (The overpay part remains the same.)

Cost: $3
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. If you do, gain a Gold. Otherwise, +1 Card.

Cost: $3
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. You may discard a card. If you do, gain a Gold.

Cost: $3
+2 Actions. Gain a Gold. Gain a Ruins. If you don't, discard 2 cards.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 04, 2015, 08:28:30 pm
If the only problem is that the Ruins run out, I'd do:

Cost: $3
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. If you do, gain a Gold.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 04, 2015, 08:30:45 pm
If the only problem is that the Ruins run out, I'd do:

Cost: $3
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. If you do, gain a Gold.

The problem is rather that a Gold in your deck seems to outweigh the negative impact of a Ruins in your deck. Also, I don't want Robber Knight to be almost useless once the Ruins run out.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 04, 2015, 08:42:02 pm
The problem is rather that a Gold in your deck seems to outweigh the negative impact of a Ruins in your deck. Also, I don't want Robber Knight to be almost useless once the Ruins run out.

Could it be a Curse instead?

How about, "If you did, gain a Gold. Otherwise, gain a Silver"?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on March 04, 2015, 09:09:31 pm
You could also change what the condition restricts:

Gain a Gold. Gain a Ruins. If you do: +2 actions

Not exactly elegant, but i think it should be somewhere between LastFootnote's first fix and the original, power wise.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 09, 2015, 03:36:52 pm
The problem is rather that a Gold in your deck seems to outweigh the negative impact of a Ruins in your deck. Also, I don't want Robber Knight to be almost useless once the Ruins run out.

Could it be a Curse instead?

How about, "If you did, gain a Gold. Otherwise, gain a Silver"?

You could also change what the condition restricts:

Gain a Gold. Gain a Ruins. If you do: +2 actions

Not exactly elegant, but i think it should be somewhere between LastFootnote's first fix and the original, power wise.

Thanks for your suggestions! I'm going to respond to the suggestions of both of you by firstly explaining what kind of card I want:
A Village, and the +2 Actions should not be conditional on something that runs out.
I don't want another Silver gainer (there's Provisioner), and it's also not Robber Knight's desired role.
I don't want another Curser, especially not one that curses the card player (Juggler does that). PS: In fact, I'm considering taking out Demagogue and perhaps salvage one of its effects for another card).
Current Robber Knight has a short-term benefit (Actions) and a long-term benefit (Gold) but only a long-term penalty (Ruins), and it should have a short-term penalty as well. So I'm in most favour of this version:

Quote
Cost: $3+
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. You may discard a card. If you do, gain a Gold. | When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpaid, you may look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.
The short-term penalty (discard 1) is small and also adds flexibility in case you just want a Village at a point. Which is why I also consider adjusting the cost to $4 (instead of $3) but that greatly depends on how strong the overpay option really is, especially compared to Doctor's. What do you think?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 09, 2015, 03:46:48 pm
I think you should definitely try it as-is (gain a Gold and a Ruins) at $4. One of the key reasons I like Robber Knight is that it's pretty simple (on-play). I think the targeted trashing is sufficiently powerful that the overpay will still be attractive at $4.

"Discard a card" is such a small price for gaining a Gold that it looks silly. And also it needlessly complicates the card.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 11, 2015, 08:26:07 pm
I think you should definitely try it as-is (gain a Gold and a Ruins) at $4. One of the key reasons I like Robber Knight is that it's pretty simple (on-play). I think the targeted trashing is sufficiently powerful that the overpay will still be attractive at $4.

"Discard a card" is such a small price for gaining a Gold that it looks silly. And also it needlessly complicates the card.

Ooookay, I'll try it as-is at the cost of $4 before I complicate it.

Now would you believe it? I came up with another card that looks pretty promising, at least to me. I salvaged a part of old Salesman (which was cut) and the bottom part of Siege (which is probably going to be cut) and the result is Capitalize!

(http://i.imgur.com/YOKMIfy.png)
Quote
Capitalize
Action/Reaction
$7
Choose a Supply pile. Cards from that pile cost $2 more this turn. Trash a card you have in play and gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.
When you play an Action card, you may reveal and play this from your hand.

There's actually a lot going on with this card but I'm glad that it turned out to look so simple. I's an Expand variant that only expands cards you have in play, which would normally be weaker than Expand but it also has a synergy with itself and other tfb cards. The Reaction part enables that. It might be a bit wonky to resolve but since Capitalize is an expensive card, I have faith that you don't use it too often and should be able to keep track of the cards you trashed from play before you actually played them. Now there's probably something very obvious on this card that I overlooked which could break the game balance and I'm just waiting for Jack Rudd or LFN to point it out.

I imagine Capitalize would go well in a Platinum/Colony game.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: pacovf on March 12, 2015, 05:13:03 am
Maybe a bit too complicated for what it does? You could make it a treasure that trashes an action card you have in play and gains a card costing up to $3 more, and in 90% of the cases it would mostly be the same. I mean, I guess you can't chain them anymore to make a single card ever more expensive... If you want to go that way, I think it could stand to be made yet more simple.

The problem with mid-turn cost-increasing cards is what happens if I play highway three times, and then use this to increase the cost of poor house?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 12, 2015, 06:50:19 am
Maybe a bit too complicated for what it does? You could make it a treasure that trashes an action card you have in play and gains a card costing up to $3 more, and in 90% of the cases it would mostly be the same. I mean, I guess you can't chain them anymore to make a single card ever more expensive... If you want to go that way, I think it could stand to be made yet more simple.
A treasure.... nah, that's way too simple. I'll think about it ;)

The problem with mid-turn cost-increasing cards is what happens if I play highway three times, and then use this to increase the cost of poor house?
Then Poor House still costs $0 because Highway's effect stays active while it's in play. What are you getting at?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: pacovf on March 12, 2015, 07:01:25 am
The problem with mid-turn cost-increasing cards is what happens if I play highway three times, and then use this to increase the cost of poor house?
Then Poor House still costs $0 because Highway's effect stays active while it's in play. What are you getting at?

Eh, it was 0 because of the highways. Then you increase it by 2 because of Capitalize. So what is it now?

If it's the "while in play" that bothers you, replace it with Bridge.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 12, 2015, 07:33:39 am
The problem with mid-turn cost-increasing cards is what happens if I play highway three times, and then use this to increase the cost of poor house?
Then Poor House still costs $0 because Highway's effect stays active while it's in play. What are you getting at?

Eh, it was 0 because of the highways. Then you increase it by 2 because of Capitalize. So what is it now?

If it's the "while in play" that bothers you, replace it with Bridge.

Then Poor House costs $2 because Bridges lower its cost only once on-play, and never below $0. So it's $0 after the Bridges and then $2 after Capitalize. Do you think that might cause confusion?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: pacovf on March 12, 2015, 07:48:58 am
Well, a ruling that makes Highway and Bridge behave differently is definitely going to cause confusion. Up to you to decide if it's worth it, or if there's some other way to do (or phrase) what you want to do.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Awaclus on March 12, 2015, 07:57:40 am
Then Poor House costs $2 because Bridges lower its cost only once on-play, and never below $0. So it's $0 after the Bridges and then $2 after Capitalize. Do you think that might cause confusion?

Then Poor House still costs $0 because Highway's effect stays active while it's in play. What are you getting at?

But I don't think that's correct. Normally, Action cards do what's printed on them right now, so it's easy ó you play a Village right now, you get +1 cards, +2 actions right now. When you play multiple Action cards with normally timed effects, you get those effects in the order you played those cards. But some cards, such as Durations, Possession, Scheme, Bridge and Capitalize make stuff happen at other times ó in the case of Bridge and Capitalize, they have effects happening "this turn", which means that it's a continuous effect that keeps happening for the duration of the entire turn. From the way Durations work, we know that in these cases when multiple cards have specially timed effects happening at the same time, the active player chooses the order when it's time to start actually doing those things, and the order in which the cards were originally played isn't at all relevant. Therefore, I think the correct way to interpret the rules here is that at all times, the active player can choose if he wants to make Bridge's effect happen before Capitalize's effect or vice versa. Which is super confusing.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 12, 2015, 08:41:49 am
I suppose, I could make this card way easier (meaning it has less possible interactions):

Quote
Capitalize
Action/Reaction
$7
Trash a card you have in play and gain a card costing up to $3 more than it.
When you play an Action card, you may play this from your hand.

As a Treasure, like Pacovf suggested, it could look somewhat like this:

Quote
Capitalize
Treasure
$7
$1. When you play this, trash a card you have in play and gain a card costing up to $3 more than it.

Maybe another way to circumvent the Bridge confusion would be to use tokens that permanently increase a card's cost. This would also keep the interaction possibilities with other tfb cards:

Quote
Capitalize
Action
$7
Put a Capitalize token on a Kingdom card pile. Trash a card you have in play and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.
A card's cost is permanently increased by $1 per Capitalize token on its pile.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: TheOthin on March 12, 2015, 10:24:11 am
The first of those three versions of Capitalize doesn't really need the Reaction element. It could go the more Procession route of "Play an Action from your hand. Trash it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than it." This would translate most of its functions into a much simpler form.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 12, 2015, 02:08:10 pm
The first of those three versions of Capitalize doesn't really need the Reaction element. It could go the more Procession route of "Play an Action from your hand. Trash it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than it." This would translate most of its functions into a much simpler form.

It would also make Capitalize even more similar to existing cards. I at least want some unusual and exciting elements in my cards. That's why I'm actually in favour of the third version above. It seems pretty simple to me and still has something new that influences other players as well, as I originally wanted the card to. What do you think of this Embargo-approach?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 13, 2015, 10:13:44 am
I just tested these versions of Robber Knight and Capitalize (which has been renamed to Valorize) in the same game:

(http://i.imgur.com/6wyafL9.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/d6r1FNs.png)

Even at the cost of $4, Robber Knight's non-terminal Gold gaining is far too good in the late game. With all the Golds in your deck, it's not hard to do one big overpay where you trash 4 or 5 Ruins from your discard pile at once, and then you're good to go. I should also mention that this was a Cultist game. I went for Robber Knights and my opponent went for Cultist and only won by 1 Estate, and that was only possible because Duke was also on the board. I was still able to score Provinces much faster, despite I gained all the Ruins.

I'm thinking to change Robber Knight so that you get either the actions or the Gold:

Quote
Gain a Ruins. Choose one: +2 Actions; or gain a Gold.

As for Valorize, the card seems solid on first impression. We played with Bridge to see of there's any cost confusion but with the cost increase now being fix and permanent, there was none. However, Valorize needs to trash from hand instead of from play, otherwise it would be nearly useless without non-terminals. It's not superior to Expand; while it stacks and works better on Kingdom cards, it's worse with basic treasures and victory cards. Also, you boost card value for your opponents as well.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on March 13, 2015, 05:35:58 pm
If it was a Cultist game, doesn't that mean Ruins should run out much faster? Considering you would have gained a fair share of Ruins anyhow, i'd say Robber Knight just is pretty Cultist resistant. You wouldn't judge Counting House on how good it is on a Mountebank Board, either. I guess what i want to say is, Robber Knight's downside and Cultist's attack are redundant, effectively pushing Robber Knight and weakening Cultist.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 13, 2015, 05:55:16 pm
How about +3 Actions or gain a Gold?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 13, 2015, 10:10:45 pm
If it was a Cultist game, doesn't that mean Ruins should run out much faster? Considering you would have gained a fair share of Ruins anyhow, i'd say Robber Knight just is pretty Cultist resistant. You wouldn't judge Counting House on how good it is on a Mountebank Board, either. I guess what i want to say is, Robber Knight's downside and Cultist's attack are redundant, effectively pushing Robber Knight and weakening Cultist.

How is Robber Knight Cultist-resistant? The Ruins are meant as a penalty for the fast Gold-gaining. I didn't even play Cultist, just Robber Knights, so I gained all 10 Ruins and still managed to almost win. The Ruins were supposed to hurt me but didn't do so enough. Maybe I got this backwards but Robber Knights definitely doesn't make Ruins a better card and you only got so few opportunities to trash them with RK as the only trasher.

Anyway, I want to try out this version of Robber Knight next:

(http://i.imgur.com/cCu1Mq8.png)

How about +3 Actions or gain a Gold?

I don't know, I'm not a fan of plain +3 Actions in general, except for Crossroads. I can't say why, though.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: crlundy on March 13, 2015, 10:32:26 pm
I think "Choose one: gain a Gold and a Ruins; or +2 Actions" is slightly less confusing and equivalent unless the Gold pile runs out (which still seems unlikely to me, even with Robber Knight in the Kingdom).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: scott_pilgrim on March 13, 2015, 10:34:41 pm
What Asper means is that, normally Cultist is crazy strong, because if you ignore it, you end up with all 10 Ruins.  Robber Knight's big drawback is that it gains Ruins on play.  Since there is only a limited number of Ruins in the supply, and Cultist is already causing you to gain them all anyway, Robber Knight's big drawback is significantly reduced.  You were gaining all 10 Ruins regardless of whether you used Robber Knight, so you might as well use it, because you still get all the good stuff from it without ending up with anymore ruins in your deck than you otherwise would have.

Obviously without Cultist that's not the case, so playtesting them together is probably not a good indicator of its power level.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on March 14, 2015, 12:00:31 pm
What Asper means is that, normally Cultist is crazy strong, because if you ignore it, you end up with all 10 Ruins.  Robber Knight's big drawback is that it gains Ruins on play.  Since there is only a limited number of Ruins in the supply, and Cultist is already causing you to gain them all anyway, Robber Knight's big drawback is significantly reduced.  You were gaining all 10 Ruins regardless of whether you used Robber Knight, so you might as well use it, because you still get all the good stuff from it without ending up with anymore ruins in your deck than you otherwise would have.

Obviously without Cultist that's not the case, so playtesting them together is probably not a good indicator of its power level.

Yes exactly, thanks for putting the thought in a structured form.

Edit: I guess my Counting House comparison was especially misleading. Robber Knight doesn't counter Cultist. The actual point is the redundancy between attack and drawback. Each for itself is balanced, but as both share the same supply of Ruins, Cultist's opportunity cost/use ratio becomes lower and Robber Knight's better. In other words: Each Robber Knight play means a Cultist play where it will just be a Lab-, and each Cultist play means one Robber Knight play where it won't gain a Ruins.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 14, 2015, 03:29:17 pm
Okay, I think I get what you mean but still Robber Knight felt too strong then, especially after the Ruins ran out. But I just tested the latest version shown above and that worked pretty well. For now, I will stick with it.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on March 14, 2015, 07:47:31 pm
Okay, I think I get what you mean but still Robber Knight felt too strong then, especially after the Ruins ran out. But I just tested the latest version shown above and that worked pretty well. For now, I will stick with it.

I think you should give the old version another shot. If you had a super-strong card that was balanced by gaining Curses on play, you wouldn't determine its strength by playing it only once on a Sea Hag board. Actually, with Curses such a card would normally be either too good or too bad, depending on whether you balance it for boards with or boards without other cursers. For Ruins, it's different: As there are only two Attack-Looters, boards where Robber Knight meets one of them are edge cases, and shouldn't be considered too relevant for balancing it.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 16, 2015, 03:57:38 pm
Okay, I think I get what you mean but still Robber Knight felt too strong then, especially after the Ruins ran out. But I just tested the latest version shown above and that worked pretty well. For now, I will stick with it.

I think you should give the old version another shot. If you had a super-strong card that was balanced by gaining Curses on play, you wouldn't determine its strength by playing it only once on a Sea Hag board. Actually, with Curses such a card would normally be either too good or too bad, depending on whether you balance it for boards with or boards without other cursers. For Ruins, it's different: As there are only two Attack-Looters, boards where Robber Knight meets one of them are edge cases, and shouldn't be considered too relevant for balancing it.

I will give it another shot. I'll just let you know that I like the latest version more and a friend, whom I playtested with, also liked it (although he only knew that one version).

Besides, I have other cards waiting for testing as well. E.g. I have reworked Demagogue. The old version (left) was either perceived as too strong as a curser or too weak because it might occasionally help your opponent. Either way, it's swingy and unreliable, and I have plenty of draw in my set anyway. New Demagogue (right) is simple and not that strong. How many curses the opponent gets depends on their knowledge of their own deck, but it can only curse every other time, so I think it can be non-terminal.

(http://i.imgur.com/SHy9jH8.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/T81M0Bz.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Ozle on March 16, 2015, 04:17:53 pm
   (http://i.imgur.com/T81M0Bz.png)

I would like to name American Express.

Although wouldnt mind discarding it, useless credit card, people should give up and move to Visa/Mastercard
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 16, 2015, 04:22:33 pm
I would like to name American Express.

Although wouldnt mind discarding it, useless credit card, people should give up and move to Visa/Mastercard

Okay, I have to +1 this, although it's not helpful at all :P
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LastFootnote on March 16, 2015, 04:26:36 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/T81M0Bz.png)

I really like the concept of this new Demagogue. I think I would prefer it as a terminal Silver rather than a cantrip, though, so you don't get swamped with Curses quite so fast when playing with three or more mean-spirited players.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Awaclus on March 16, 2015, 04:29:39 pm
Okay, I have to +1 this, although it's not helpful at all :P

Every Ozle post ever.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 16, 2015, 04:29:48 pm
I really like the concept of this new Demagogue. I think I would prefer it as a terminal Silver rather than a cantrip, though, so you don't get swamped with Curses quite so fast when playing with three or more mean-spirited players.
Ah, I tend to initially forget there are multiplayer games, too :D I need to update my list with the vanilla bonusses of all my cards so I can see quickly of which kind the set can stand more.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on March 16, 2015, 04:59:40 pm
I like the new Demagogue. The idea to have an attack that you can fend off by knowing your deck is intriguing.

Is there a specific reason why it doesn't always discard the card besides blocking every other attack? I think that if you only discard it when you name it, you're inclined to name bad cards - especially once the Curses run out, where the card becomes actually helpful to your opponents. So i'd argue that balancing the card a different way would be better.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 17, 2015, 08:44:37 pm
I like the new Demagogue. The idea to have an attack that you can fend off by knowing your deck is intriguing.

Is there a specific reason why it doesn't always discard the card besides blocking every other attack? I think that if you only discard it when you name it, you're inclined to name bad cards - especially once the Curses run out, where the card becomes actually helpful to your opponents. So i'd argue that balancing the card a different way would be better.

The reason is that, if the attack is non-terminal, the other players only gain a curse every other time because then they know the top card of their deck (because they've revealed it before). But LFN is right - it's probably better to make Demagogue terminal, and +$2 seems like a suitable vanilla bonus for it. In that case, it might as well always discard the top card of other players' decks. That's less text which is good.

The only other card currently in my set with plain +$2 on top is Blackmail, also a junking (or discard) attack costing $4 so there should only be one of them in that form. I have thought long about it and I am now inclined to cut Blackmail as-is from the set. It's a solid card, both economically and as an attack, and easy enough to resolve. But it's never been super exciting and now the new Demagogue looks like a much more interesting replacement, with +$2 instead of +1 Card, +1 Action, anyway.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 19, 2015, 03:34:41 pm
I played a game with 3 players and the following cards:

Quote
Secret Chamber, Great Hall, Sage, Market Square, Robber Knight (+2 Actions, gain a Gold and a Ruins; cost $4), Demagogue (+$2, always discard), Knights, Bastion, Farmland, Altar

The board was mainly meant to test Robber Knight again, the version that unconditionally gains Gold and Ruins. Hence the board lacked ways of deck thinning, except RK's overpay function, and other Looters. I set the 3 players up to pursue different strategies:

Player A bought a lot of Robber Knights (but opened SC/Dame Sylvia) and played them excessively. They only overpaid once for $4. Although they had the largest deck and 7 Curses (and tons of Ruins), they were the only player with 2 Provinces and won with 21 VP. Also, they had 8 Golds in their deck in the end.
Player B opened RK/Sage and bought some more RKs but also Demagogues. With $5 they did the largest overpay, had 6 Golds in the end but only 11 VP. I don't really know why.
Player C was only allowed to buy Robber Knights to overpay but not to play them (except once when they needed the +2 Actions). Consequently, they trashed the RKs to Farmland (or attacking Knights). They had Dame Natalie but only one Gold. Final score: 16 VP. I don't think I played their deck horribly, but with no deck thinning around, player A's deck was just faster.

The game ended on piles, as expected. First, Knights ran out, then Robber Knights, then Curses. At a certain point, player A started to prevail (which was also due to shuffle luck). They shrugged off the Ruins as well as the Curses. Gold is a really good card, and player A was able to play 2 RKs in one turn at least twice. Therefore, non-terminal Gold gaining should be severely penalised and a Ruins just isn't gonna cut it.
I want to compare RK to LastFootnote's Profiteer. Profiteer puts the Gold on top of your deck, hence the penalty is stronger. I consider giving your opponents a free Conscripts as harsher because you cannot control what they do with it and it might backfire unto you, especially with other Attacks on the board. A Ruins is just some junk (and not even the worst kind) and there are plenty of trashers (more than attacks) in the Dominion universe to deal with it.
I don't want RK to be non-terminal at the same time as it gains a Gold. Either one or the other. Also, I came up with another village idea I want to share with the forum soon. So I don't need RK to give +2 Actions any more. I think, it could just be "Gain a Gold and a Ruins" at the cost of $3+.

PS: Secret Chamber is the perfect defence against Demagogue. I like it a lot when a normally bad card gets to really shine in specific combos.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on May 17, 2015, 08:23:34 am
Hey guys, let's brush the dust off this thread and bring it back to life, shall we? I was on vacation for a few weeks and then had no internet at home for another two weeks but I kept developing new concepts, discarding old ones and play-testing like crazy. I took out the following cards:

Blackmail: It's similar to Ambassador, not too similar in my opinion, but with the new terminal-Silver Demagogue, I found a more interesting junking attack for $4.
Market Town: The old version looks crammed and the reaction is similar too Horse Traders. I tried another reaction with less text but it turned out to cause a loophole with Ironworks (which I should have seen coming). I want to bring MT back but I need a new idea first.
Mandate and Courier: The original idea was to have a crossover between Throne Room and Band of Misfits, which was problematic in many ways and the resulting cards I tested turned out to be fiddly, clunky and nigh impossible to balance. I have other, simpler ideas for TR variants which I will present soon.
Siege: Adventures showed how duration-attacks should be made to be reasonable and interesting. Siege is two or three concepts glued together that make the card unnecessarily complicated and clunky. I dropped the case completely.

Before I show any new cards, let's have a look at some tweaking I made recently:

(http://i.imgur.com/26ZS8YH.png)
Quote
Robber Knight, $3+, Action
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. If you do, gain a Gold.[/hr]When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpaid, look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.
This version works out great. From my experience so far I can deduce this: (1) Robber Knight accelerates games significantly, which means that making gaining the Gold conditional on gaining the Ruins hardly matters, because when the Ruins pile is empty, the game is close to ending anyway. And (2), Robber Knight is a very good card for $3. My friends like it but suggested it costs $4. I am reluctant to raise its cost because I like having the option of overpaying on a 3-4 opening to trash a card before the first shuffle.
In the game we played (3 players) I bought 4 or 5 RKs and played them a lot and also overpaid a lot to complement the trashing from Count. I still only won by a Duchy. We had 4 Provinces each, although one friend only had two RKs so it could not have been the only decisive card (which leads to the assumption it's balanced in power). I probably just won because I played a little better.

(http://i.imgur.com/ALUWMpl.png)
Quote
Demagogue, $4, Action/ Attack
+$2. Each other player names a card and discards the top card of their deck. If itís not the named card, they gain a Curse.
With LFN's suggestion, this should be a fun and not too harsh attack.. My friends liked it and wanted to play with it, but we didn't get to it, yet. I think it's cool like this and look forward to testing it.

(http://i.imgur.com/z3svIbs.png)
Quote
Valorize, $7, Action
Put a Valorize token on a Kingdom card pile. Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.[/hr]A cardís cost is permanently increased by $1 per Valorize token on its Supply pile.
Valorize (formerly Capitalize) is now an Expand variant that allows you to build stacks on Kingdom cards but remains a Remodel for basic Supply cards. Since it's so expensive and slow but increases in power over time, it probably justifies a game with Colonies.

That's it for now. I would appreciate your feedback. New cards will follow soon.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 13, 2015, 07:40:07 am
Asper and I have played a lot of games recently using cards from his, my, and other fan expansions. These are the we had experiences with my cards:

Realm Tax is easily a crucial card on many boards as it's often not that hard to reach the point where it's worth $3. Asper has not been the first to suggest I raise its basic cost to $1 or $2 but I am rather inclined to raise the action threshold to $4 or even $5.

Deposit worked out very nicely, in my opinion at least. It's very slow but the payload is so explosive and rewarding that you should almost never use it to thin down your deck. It can be the central point of your strategy (megaturn) or just a temporary measure to reach crucial price points.

Demagogue seems balanced. It depends on your opponent's deck-tracking skills and on luck which should be reasonable for a terminal-Silver curser costing $4.

Reconvert was fine, if I remember correctly. Asper, do you recall any interesting details about Reconvert in our game?

Beachcomb is sometimes crazy strong but when it whiffs (when there's no discard pile) it's terrible (relative to its high cost). We're not sure if it needs a nerf. Sometimes the fact that it's a cantrip is a nerf per se because it might trigger a reshuffle. This makes the card very swingy. We did not use its reaction, and it rarely gets used in practise. Still, it might be pretty powerful when you can use it.

Benefit's sheer gaining power is obviously board dependent and in our game it was very useful but its action part seems balanced. The penalty matters in the endgame in head-to-head VP races and threatens unforeseeable three-pile-endings in multiplayer games. The reaction part wasn't used and Asper raised concerns over it in curser games. Benefit may be reason enough to forego most cursers. But then again, we are far away from being top players so we might underestimate the importance of cursing. Only thing I know is you always buy Witch ;)

Reparations has been dominating every board so far, and I feel like this is not so much because of its insane endgame power but rather due to how easy it makes reaching this point (two empty piles). I want to limit the cards it can gain to costing up to $3 and try that version. My expectation is that this will cause it to be gained later in the game than currently usual, and sometimes ignored. This is what I want because, as is, it's too dominant.

Bastion is strong, always useful and probably a priority to gain until the pile is empty. At least I feel this way. So its penalty for empty piles gets activated almost automatically in every game and that's a good thing.

Valorize, I am afraid, might suffer from the Rebuild syndrome. After several plays it gets so powerful that you can threaten to end the game on Provinces at any time. It coerces the other players to invest in Valorize as well, otherwise they are probably going to lose. It might be balanced but it's hard to determine because Asper didn't gain it (and was crushed because of that). But, like Rebuild, it might not be fun at all due to the factors mentioned above. I'm almost certain this card should only be used with Colonies.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Asper on June 13, 2015, 09:01:27 am
Reconvert was fine, if I remember correctly. Asper, do you recall any interesting details about Reconvert in our game?

It was a Port game, and i trashed Ports for coins, thinking i should use Reconvert like a buy-less Salvager. Which wasn't that effective. You played Port and trashed something different for +Cards, which totally enabled using Reconvert as an engine piece. I wasn't prepared for that. I guess the fact that Port gave you easily available tfb-Targets helped, though you mostly used Reparations for gaining them. I'm still not entirely sure Reconvert doesn't compare too favourably to Salvager, even though the +buy might be cruicial in some situations.

Beachcomb is sometimes crazy strong but when it whiffs (when there's no discard pile) it's terrible (relative to its high cost). We're not sure if it needs a nerf. Sometimes the fact that it's a cantrip is a nerf per se because it might trigger a reshuffle. This makes the card very swingy. We did not use its reaction, and it rarely gets used in practise. Still, it might be pretty powerful when you can use it.

I thought Beachcomb was much better than Lab and was surprisedit isn't. Still i'm not sure it needs the Reaction to be worthwile. Maybe use it to make another, slightly less interesting card, better.

Benefit's sheer gaining power is obviously board dependent and in our game it was very useful but its action part seems balanced. The penalty matters in the endgame in head-to-head VP races and threatens unforeseeable three-pile-endings in multiplayer games. The reaction part wasn't used and Asper raised concerns over it in curser games. Benefit may be reason enough to forego most cursers. But then again, we are far away from being top players so we might underestimate the importance of cursing. Only thing I know is you always buy Witch ;)

I also think Benefit's on-play-effect is so good that its Reaction, which is neat but not that strong, might go unused most of the time. And yes, for Curser games it's a reaction that harms the attacker, so that's definitely something i' try to avoid. Repeating this for others, i think Messenger does a similar effect in a less problematic way.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on June 13, 2015, 10:28:19 pm
Reparations has been dominating every board so far, and I feel like this is not so much because of its insane endgame power but rather due to how easy it makes reaching this point (two empty piles). I want to limit the cards it can gain to costing up to $3 and try that version. My expectation is that this will cause it to be gained later in the game than currently usual, and sometimes ignored. This is what I want because, as is, it's too dominant.
You could try making it worth $1 +$1 for each empty supply pile in addition to its gaining. It makes it stronger to start, but it never gets to be worth $4.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on June 14, 2015, 07:10:39 pm
Realm Tax is easily a crucial card on many boards as it's often not that hard to reach the point where it's worth $3. Asper has not been the first to suggest I raise its basic cost to $1 or $2 but I am rather inclined to raise the action threshold to 4 or even 5.
I think it'd be a good idea to raise the action threshold to 5, but the basic problem with the card would still be there. It's a card that will usually not be hard to play as a gold most of the time, yet you buy it for really cheap. I think I'd both raise the action threshold and raise the basic cost.
I think Fool's Gold is a good comparison. You need to get two of them to line up to make each of them worth $2.5. Three Fool's Golds in a hand makes them each worth the same as a gold. With Realm Tax, you can play one action for +Buy and get two Realm Taxes (or three if your action is a squire) for $1 each (cheaper than fool's gold), and I don't think it'll be much harder (if any) to get them activated than fool's golds are. Since Fool's Gold is already one of the strongest $2 cost cards, I'd give Realm Tax a base cost of $1 even if you also raise the action threshold to 4 or 5.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal (fan card set)
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 14, 2015, 08:37:31 pm
Realm Tax is easily a crucial card on many boards as it's often not that hard to reach the point where it's worth $3. Asper has not been the first to suggest I raise its basic cost to $1 or $2 but I am rather inclined to raise the action threshold to 4 or even 5.
I think it'd be a good idea to raise the action threshold to 5, but the basic problem with the card would still be there. It's a card that will usually not be hard to play as a gold most of the time, yet you buy it for really cheap. I think I'd both raise the action threshold and raise the basic cost.
I think Fool's Gold is a good comparison. You need to get two of them to line up to make each of them worth $2.5. Three Fool's Golds in a hand makes them each worth the same as a gold. With Realm Tax, you can play one action for +Buy and get two Realm Taxes (or three if your action is a squire) for $1 each (cheaper than fool's gold), and I don't think it'll be much harder (if any) to get them activated than fool's golds are. Since Fool's Gold is already one of the strongest $2 cost cards, I'd give Realm Tax a base cost of $1 even if you also raise the action threshold to 4 or 5.

I will not nerf the card twice at once before trying if one nerf is sufficient. I will start by raising the action threshold to carefully adjust Realm Tax's power instead of beating it with a sledgehammer into uselessness. It's not that easy to play 4 or 5 actions a turn early in a game. But you need to gain RT early, and with a high action threshold, it will often get in your way and only be worth $1. If you don't have an engine, you will never activate it anyway.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 21, 2015, 12:02:36 pm
I have updated the OP (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11563.0). As you can see, there are four new additions to the set. Although Refugees isn't technically new. Please tell me what you think of them.

(http://i.imgur.com/uj8Skhy.png)(http://i.imgur.com/whsoC8v.png)(http://i.imgur.com/MViXS6g.png)(http://i.imgur.com/eF5ysuR.png)


I have also made changes to some cards. Benefit got a new reaction, and Realm Tax and Reparations will be nerfed.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: faust on June 22, 2015, 08:41:58 am
Capital makes openings very swingy. For example, if I open 5/2, I can play an Estate on my $2 turn, making all Estates miss the shuffle and probably drawing a Copper in hand. If I open 2/5, however, on my first turn I have to decide whether I only want one $3 card added to my deck after the first shuffle, or if I prefer buying a $2 over a $3, neither of which are great options.

I fix I can think of is to change it from a "In games using this" clause to a "While this is in play" clause. That's also more interesting as it disables boring BM strategies where you use Provinces for draw - which would probably be decently strong otherwise.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: faust on June 22, 2015, 08:46:28 am
Also, the "it" on Prefect is ambiguous, as it's not clear whether it refers to the Province or to the Prefect. It makes a pretty big difference, and I have no idea which of these two options you intended. Also, the last part probably should read "If you do, at the end of this turn's clean up phase, draw two extra cards" or something, that sounds clearer.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 22, 2015, 09:12:19 am
Capital makes openings very swingy. For example, if I open 5/2, I can play an Estate on my $2 turn, making all Estates miss the shuffle and probably drawing a Copper in hand. If I open 2/5, however, on my first turn I have to decide whether I only want one $3 card added to my deck after the first shuffle, or if I prefer buying a $2 over a $3, neither of which are great options.

I fix I can think of is to change it from a "In games using this" clause to a "While this is in play" clause. That's also more interesting as it disables boring BM strategies where you use Provinces for draw - which would probably be decently strong otherwise.

This is a deliberate decision. One of the themes of Roots and Renewal is manipulations of the opening turns, and Capital is supposed to do that. T1 and T2 are already very swingy so by adding a decision for players to it, it can only improve.

Also, the "it" on Prefect is ambiguous, as it's not clear whether it refers to the Province or to the Prefect. It makes a pretty big difference, and I have no idea which of these two options you intended. Also, the last part probably should read "If you do, at the end of this turn's clean up phase, draw two extra cards" or something, that sounds clearer.

It is supposed to set aside the Province and I guess I should make that more clear. However, for the second part I used the exact same wording as Expedition so there should be no misunderstanding there.

Also, I am aware that the name "Quest" is already taken by an Event but I haven't come up with an alternative, yet.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on June 22, 2015, 02:16:28 pm
I suggested these things before, but i'm going to repeat it for good measure. I think Quest should just look at the top four cards, put one in your hand and discard the rest. Faster to resolve, no "I should have taken the Silver instead", easier wording.

Also, thinking about the name, Quest is a classic Peddler+ for $5, like Junk Dealer, Market, Baker, Artificer, Highway... What makes this one special is that you look at the top cards of your deck and choose one, so look what fits here. Something about Maps, Cards, Scouts, Travel seems to fit (and Quest fits too). Voyager?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LastFootnote on June 22, 2015, 02:24:02 pm
Adventures had an Reserve outtake that allowed you to call it to set aside a gained card onto your Tavern mat. It was too strong to be able to set aside Provinces, etc. as you gained them. Prefect is more expensive ($5 instead of $2), but it's also WAY stronger (+6 Cards instead of "gain a Silver per card the player to your right gained on his last turn"). I don't think it's going to work out.

Maybe I've said this before, but Refugees' gimmick of being an easy pile to empty doesn't really excite me; certainly not enough to warrant its own mat.

I agree with Asper that Quest should just look at the top X cards of your deck. If X is 4, then it doesn't need +$1; it's plenty strong without it. If X is 2, then sure +$1 is good.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on June 22, 2015, 03:04:13 pm
I agree with Asper that Quest should just look at the top X cards of your deck. If X is 4, then it doesn't need +$1; it's plenty strong without it. If X is 2, then sure +$1 is good.

Wouldn't 4 cards without coin make it relatively similar to, and a bit weaker than, Cartographer? Cartographer can always decide to keep good cards on your deck. Hmm... On the other hand, a single Cartographer wouldn't draw the wanted card, unlike a single Quest. I guess 4 cards without coin would be fair. I'd say having the coin with less cards seems more attractive, though.

One could say the original wording also solves the "not too similar to Cartographer" problem and also makes it a bit weaker to compensate for the coin, but i just don't see it being very enjoyable.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 22, 2015, 05:05:02 pm
Adventures had an Reserve outtake that allowed you to call it to set aside a gained card onto your Tavern mat. It was too strong to be able to set aside Provinces, etc. as you gained them. Prefect is more expensive ($5 instead of $2), but it's also WAY stronger (+6 Cards instead of "gain a Silver per card the player to your right gained on his last turn"). I don't think it's going to work out.

Maybe I've said this before, but Refugees' gimmick of being an easy pile to empty doesn't really excite me; certainly not enough to warrant its own mat.

I agree with Asper that Quest should just look at the top X cards of your deck. If X is 4, then it doesn't need +$1; it's plenty strong without it. If X is 2, then sure +$1 is good.

I don't see why Prefect wouldn't work out (although I have erred plenty in the past). It's supposed to only work with Provinces and the draw bonus, both on-play and on-call can be easily adjusted if they're too strong.

I agree your suggestions would make Quest easier to resolve but also less unique. I want to try out a new mechanic and if that proves to be to fiddly or un-fun or whatever, I'd rather drop the case completely than have something very similar to existing cards.

Nonetheless, I appreciate your opinions, so please keep responding. The thing is, these cards have barely been tested, yet, so I will keep your suggestions in mind but not tweak the cards before I have tested them.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 25, 2015, 06:31:51 am
At first I didn't see why Prefect wouldn't work out, as I could have just nerfed the draw bonuses as needed, until Asper disabused me; In a good engine, playing multiple Prefects and calling them back in the same turn when you gain a single or double Province becomes too automatic and wasn't my original intention. Prefect was actually supposed to be a one-shot for draw, and then (on the Tavern mat) a one-shot for setting aside a Province, and that's what I'm reverting to.

(http://i.imgur.com/GyXzJUL.png)

There's another new card named Tollkeeper that I want to try out. It's a severely nerfed version of a card that wanted to be a Horse Trader variant but turned out to be way too strong. I kept the concept "draw when your opponents play good Treasures" and built the rest of the card around it. I don't know if it's at all good.

(http://i.imgur.com/mg9vn6J.png)

Other small changes have been made:
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on June 25, 2015, 07:23:50 am
Just some quick things: Didn't you want to make Tollkeeper do that Cellar thing? Also it says "at the start of your next turn" twice. Also it can do the drawing "while in play", because it's not an attack.

What i wanted to say (and possibly contrary to what i said before, so excuses for that): You might want it to give some small bonus next turn, too, otherwise it's not a terminal Silver worst case, but worse - it's a terminal Silver you can play less often. Maybe a buy? Like:

Quote
+2$
At the start of your next turn: +1 Buy and discard down to 5 cards.
---
While this is in play, when another player plays a Treasure costing $3 or more, draw a card.

Also gives it some more uses in case Treasures seem useless. Or use the Cellar effect you meant to do:

Quote
+2$
At the start of your next turn: Discard any number of cards. +1 Card per card discarded.
---
While this is in play, wehen another player plays a Treasure costing $3 or more, draw a card.

The Cellar still strikes me as a bit too strong, so i'd personally go with some other bonus. I know i myself suggested not doing any bonus at all, but maybe that wasn't as bright. I think i misjudged how the Duration affects the card's strength now that it doesn't give +$3 anymore.

Also i think limiting Shire to non-VP is reasonable. Not only because it's "nonterminal" Smugglers, but also because stealing away the last of a VP card when you were able to buy two is really nasty.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 25, 2015, 09:27:23 am
Just some quick things: Didn't you want to make Tollkeeper do that Cellar thing? Also it says "at the start of your next turn" twice. Also it can do the drawing "while in play", because it's not an attack.

What i wanted to say (and possibly contrary to what i said before, so excuses for that): You might want it to give some small bonus next turn, too, otherwise it's not a terminal Silver worst case, but worse - it's a terminal Silver you can play less often. Maybe a buy?

According to my notes my (our) last accord was it should discard down to 5 cards next turn, namely because you reminded me that with a Cellar effect it would be imbalanced with respect to the number of players. But you're right it doesn't need the "until your next turn" phrase. I didn't realise Adventures durations have it because they're attacks, not because it's a better wording. Lastly, a +buy next turn seems reasonable.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LastFootnote on June 25, 2015, 10:32:47 am
Tollkeeper seems very cool. It could be "while in play" without creating rules issues, but keeping it on-play allows you to throne it (good) and also makes the card's effect easier to understand (because you read about drawing cards before you read about discarding down to 5). I'd keep it on-play.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Fragasnap on June 26, 2015, 09:44:04 pm
Quote
Capital
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +2 Actions. You may trash this. If you do, +2 Cards.
In games using this, Basic Victory cards may be played as if they were Action cards for +Cards equal to half of their cost (rounded down).
The Action is a cute counterpoint to Mining Village, but is probably a lot more frustrating than it. +2 Cards has a lot more variable value than +$2.
One of my favorite parts of Dominion is the way Victory cards weigh players down. Games like Ascension, Star Realms, and Thunderstone all fall into the trap of making cards good for player's decks also good for player's scores. This causes the economic snowball to spin out of control and makes deck building stupidly easy. Dominion is fantastic because of how incredibly hard it is to build a deck effectively. Capital destroys that since Provinces are now not only commonly the best source of Victory points, but also powerful Action cards (Hunting Grounds to be precise). Because the effect is tied to Capital I am sure that BM/Province would not be the best thing ever because Capital ensures there will always be a splitter in Kingdoms with this effect. However, that does not change that the ability to draw 4 cards for playing Provinces would make the first player to gain a Province not only the player with the most points but also the player in the best position to gain more Provinces.
I do not like Capital.

Quote
Prefect
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $5
+4 Cards. Put this on your Tavern mat.
When you buy a Province, you may trash this from your Tavern mat. If you do, put the Province on your Tavern mat and draw 2 extra cards for your next hand.
This seems reasonable, if a little boring. Again, I love the way Victory cards weigh players down and Prefect makes Provinces stronger by removing them immediately and safely from player's decks.

Quote
Refugees
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. Choose one: +$1; or trash a card from your hand.
Setup: Put this onto the Refugees mat. At the start of each player's turn, if the Refugees piles is empty, put a card from the Refugees mat into the Supply.
I am not compelled by this mechanism and do not think it is worth a whole mat added to the game. The way I see it playing, it will make games end frustratingly early since it makes rush strategies so much easier.

Quote
Routing
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action, +$1. Do this until you put a card into your hand, but no more than 4 times: Look at the top card of your deck; discard it or put it into your hand.
I think I agree that this takes quite a bit of processing and a bit of bothersome "push your luck" for little benefit. How about looking at the top 3 and top decking 2?

Quote
Tollkeeper
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $3
+$2. At the start of your next turn: Discard down to 5 cards in hand.
While this is in play, when another player plays a Treasure costing $3 or more, you may draw a card.
This one is pretty cool. Weak enough that it likely won't discourage Silvers, strong enough to be playable after other players have committed to a more money centric strategy. I wonder how often players would avoid playing money centric strategies to counter Tollkeeper.

Quote
Benefit
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $5
Gain 2 cards with a total cost of up to $7. Each other player may gain an Estate.
When you would gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, instead gain a card costing up to $2.
Super board dependent, but likely enables some cool stuff with good cards at the $2 and $3 price points. I like it.

Quote
Bog Village
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +2 Actions. You may choose one: Trash a Kingdom card from the Supply; or return a card from the Trash to the Supply. Either way, if you returned a copy of Bog Village to the Supply this turn, +$1.
I'm not sure I like the politics and natural luck in the card with players putting Bog Villages into the trash. From experience, the ability to get the "on-trash" effects of cards from the Supply is silly and I recommend wording to get around it.
I am not sure I like the way this can elongate or shorten the game by trashing Kingdom piles indiscriminately. I might like it better if it could only trash and return Bog Villages.

Quote
Realm Tax
Types: Treasure
Cost: $0*
If there are at least 4 Actions in play, this is worth $3. Otherwise this is worth $1.
This costs $1 more per Action in play.
Realm Tax should really count "Actions you have in play" rather than any Action in play since it counts other player's Durations as written. This is probably fun on most boards, though there are boards that will make this worthless.

Quote
Reparations
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
Worth $2 per empty Supply pile. When you play this, gain a card costing up to $3.
This is a pretty smart way to use the Supply. I like it.

Quote
Shire
Types: Victory, Reaction
Cost: $4
Worth 1VP per empty Supply pile.
When another player gains a non-Victory card costing up to $6, you may discard this. If you do, gain a copy of that card.
Worth a significant number of Victory points (likely 2VP) and acts effectively as a Smugglers that can be used on any other player's turns. I think it compares too well to Smugglers, especially in multiplayer. I might consider increasing its cost to $5.

Quote
Bastion
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+2 Cards, +1 Action, +$1. Discard a card per empty Supply pile.
Probably not worth buying on any board that might have a Supply pile empty. I don't like how this becomes utterly terrible if two Supply piles empty. I would cap the discard to 1 card if any Supply piles are empty to make its effectiveness more even.

Quote
Beachcomb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $5
+1 Card, +1 Action. Look through your discard pile and put a card from it into your hand.
When you would trash a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, discard that card instead.
I think this plays too much better than Laboratory most of the time even without its Reaction. With its Reaction, I think this will be incredibly powerful since it can save Remodeled Provinces. Please get rid of that interaction.

Quote
Builder
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+$1. All cards cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $1.
When another player plays an Attack, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Battlement from the Battlement pile, putting it on top of your deck.
Quote
Battlement
Types: Action
Cost: $3*
+2 Actions. You may gain an Attack.
When you trash this, each other player trashes an Attack he has in play.
(This is not in the Supply.)
I like Battlement, but I don't like Builder. Builder provides a boring cost reduction since it does not give any of the pieces it needs to make cost reduction exciting and caps prices at a different point than any other official card which causes rules confusion.

Quote
Building Crane
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards, +1 Action. Return this to the Supply. If you do, Building Crane cards cost $2 less this turn, but not less than $0.
This is interesting. One would probably never buy it without some sort of +Buy being available, but that is common enough to not worry about it.

Quote
Demagogue
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
+$2. Each other player names a card and discards the top card of his deck. If it's not the named card, he gains a Curse.
I like the idea, mostly because I like naming cards, but I do not like how this encourages a monolithic deck construction for all players. I especially don't like that this discards the card. One is likely to have Copper or Curse the most common card in their deck, so a player will name one of those. If he is wrong, he not only possibly discarded a good card from his deck, he also has to gain a Curse!

Quote
Deposit
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Buy. Choose one: Set a Treasure from your hand onto your Deposit mat; or play any number of cards from your Deposit mat twice each in any order.
This is probably a game decider here since it gives a +Buy. I think I would be more interested if this did not come with the +Buy packaged onto it, but maybe that would make it too weak. I think most of the time players will only store Coppers and then play 4 of them at once for a double Province turn later.

Quote
Draft Horses
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+$1. Look through your discard pile. Reveal up to 3 Actions from your discard pile and hand and put them on top of your deck in any order.
I do not think that being able to top deck Actions from your hand is necessary. It would be simpler and largely the same for only digging through the discard pile. I like this one.

Quote
Juggler
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each player (including you) may discard a Curse. If he didn't, he gains a Curse, putting it into his hand. You may return a Curse from your hand to the Supply. If you didn't, +$2.
Interesting. I cannot really say much else about it without playing it.

Quote
Money Launderer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Gain 2 Coppers, putting them into your hand. At the start of Clean-Up this turn, return any number of Coppers from your hand to the Supply. Coppers cost $1 more this turn.
I think the card would look a lot cleaner if its cost increment was a "while this is in play" effect instead since it would get a horizontal rule.
I would increment the cost of Coppers by $2 to make those trash-for-benefit shenanigans more prevalent. I think it would be too hard to play a million Money Launderers.

Quote
Mediator
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck. For each card revealed, if it is an... Action card: +1 Action. Treasure card: take a Coin token. Victory card, +1VP. Put one into your hand and discard the other.
This seems pretty alright. I don't like that it uses Coin tokens from Guilds and VP tokens from Prosperity.

Quote
Poacher
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card, +1 Action. Discard any number of Poachers. For each Poacher discarded: +2 Cards and trash a card from your hand.
Setup: Replace one of each player's starting Estates or Shelters with a Forest Hut.
Quote
Forest Hut
Types: Action, Shelter
Cost: $1
+1 Action, +1 Buy. You may discard a card. If you do, +$1.
I do not like the Shelter. It is a Dark Ages thing and replacing one of the other Shelters with a Forest Hut seems like a weird starting game decision. I think Poacher is too weak to be useful, even with the ability to open with 2 of them.

Quote
Provisioner
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Gain a Silver. Play any number of Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
When you gain this, you may set aside a Copper you have in play. At the start of your next turn, play it.
This is almost certainly too strong. Its effect for you is better than Vault and that card affords a benefit to other players to make it weaker!

Quote
Reconvert
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +Card; or +Actions; or +$. You get the choice equal to the cost in $ of the trashed card.
Flexible and likely useful in a variety of circumstances. Not exciting, but likely effective.

Quote
Robber Knight
Types: Action, Looter
Cost: $3+
+2 Actions. Gain a Ruins. If you do, gain a Gold.
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpaid, look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.
Weird card. I don't think it would be a lot of fun since you would be left with a high variance deck of Ruins that you can only play by drawing them with your Robber Knight and Golds.
I bet whoever happened to have a handful of Golds collide late in the shuffle would end up winning by overpaying for Robber Knight and getting to trash most of their Ruins and possibly some other junk.

Quote
Royalty
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Each other player reveals cards from their deck until he reveals an Action or Treasure costing $2 or more. He discards it and puts the rest back on top in any order they choose. Gain an Action or Treasure costing up to $2 more than one of the discarded cards.
I would let the player of Royalty gain a "non-Victory card" rather than "an Action or Treasure." This will always be able to gain at least a $4 but will often be hitting $3+ cards and thus gaining $5, likely often enough to make Royalty worth $5.
Unique and powerful gainer Attack.

Quote
Sentinel
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Put up to 2 cards from your hand on top of your deck. Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. Trash any number of them and put the rest back in any order.
Strength through flexibility. I am certain this is a strong card but you cannot ask me to be excited about it.

Quote
Suburb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
This is a very weak splitter effect that comes with a Reaction to make it better. I think the Reaction could trigger whenever it was discarded "except from Play" and it would still be reasonable.

Quote
Valorize
Types: Action
Cost: $7
Put a Valorize token on a Kingdom pile. Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.
A card's cost is increased by $1 per Valorize token on its Supply pile.
I can understand how this would be super powerful. If you required that the Valorize token be placed upon the card trashed or gained you might be able to limit its power effectively enough.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 27, 2015, 08:15:24 am
Thank you for the elaborate reply, Fragasnap. I am pissed because I have to write my replies to you all over because I accidentally deleted a lot of text in one misclick but I will try to remain calm and friendly. Itís got nothing to do with you ;)

Capital
The Action is a cute counterpoint to Mining Village, but is probably a lot more frustrating than it. +2 Cards has a lot more variable value than +$2.
One of my favorite parts of Dominion is the way Victory cards weigh players down. Games like Ascension, Star Realms, and Thunderstone all fall into the trap of making cards good for player's decks also good for player's scores. This causes the economic snowball to spin out of control and makes deck building stupidly easy. Dominion is fantastic because of how incredibly hard it is to build a deck effectively. Capital destroys that since Provinces are now not only commonly the best source of Victory points, but also powerful Action cards (Hunting Grounds to be precise). Because the effect is tied to Capital I am sure that BM/Province would not be the best thing ever because Capital ensures there will always be a splitter in Kingdoms with this effect. However, that does not change that the ability to draw 4 cards for playing Provinces would make the first player to gain a Province not only the player with the most points but also the player in the best position to gain more Provinces.
I do not like Capital.
Fair enough, +4 Cards on a Province is a huge deal. The main point of Capital for me is that it gives Estates the ability to be played for +1 Card to modify the opening turns. Capitalís ďin games using thisĒ effect could just be limited to that. The +2 Cards bonus is arbitrary and merely replacing its former effect ďYou may gain a Victory card costing up to $1 per Action card you have in playĒ which was ridiculous. I donít see how +2 Cards would be frustrating on a village, though.

Quote
Prefect
This seems reasonable, if a little boring. Again, I love the way Victory cards weigh players down and Prefect makes Provinces stronger by removing them immediately and safely from player's decks.
I suppose you donít like Explorer and Tournament, or Crossroads. I havenít really much to say about this version of Prefect, as it hasnít been tested, other than it might be too easy/automatic to do its thing.

Quote
Refugees
I am not compelled by this mechanism and do not think it is worth a whole mat added to the game. The way I see it playing, it will make games end frustratingly early since it makes rush strategies so much easier.
I just donít know where else to put the Refugees not-in-the-Supply. I donít want them in the trash at the start of the game, I canít use Tavern matsÖ a Refugees mat seemed like the easiest thing to me. However, itís really just any place the card text can refer to. You can put the surplus Refugees anywhere you like as long as they are visibly not in the Supply. Put them on the Trade Route mat, it doesnít matter.

Quote
Routing
I think I agree that this takes quite a bit of processing and a bit of bothersome "push your luck" for little benefit. How about looking at the top 3 and top decking 2?
This would be too similar to several fan cards Iíve seen. Like I said before, Iíll either do my own unique version, or none :P

Quote
Tollkeeper
This one is pretty cool. Weak enough that it likely won't discourage Silvers, strong enough to be playable after other players have committed to a more money centric strategy. I wonder how often players would avoid playing money centric strategies to counter Tollkeeper.
This cards needs to be tested on games with 3 or more players. I would be happy to get any support, as I mostly get to play with only 1 person.

Quote
Benefit
Super board dependent, but likely enables some cool stuff with good cards at the $2 and $3 price points. I like it.
Itís one of my own favourite cards, especially with the new reaction. Iíve had Benefit in a couple of games and there has been a place for it in every deck. Itís probably only bad as a BM enabler.

Quote
Bog Village
I'm not sure I like the politics and natural luck in the card with players putting Bog Villages into the trash. From experience, the ability to get the "on-trash" effects of cards from the Supply is silly and I recommend wording to get around it.
I am not sure I like the way this can elongate or shorten the game by trashing Kingdom piles indiscriminately. I might like it better if it could only trash and return Bog Villages.
I donít see how Bog Village is luck dependent, even in multiplayer games. Why would you trash a BV from the Supply if you cannot ensure you return it within the same turn?
Harnessing on-trash bonuses from the Supply may be silly but also a lot of fun. And it doesnít seem more game changing to me than, say, Watchtower.

Quote
Realm Tax
Realm Tax should really count "Actions you have in play" rather than any Action in play since it counts other player's Durations as written. This is probably fun on most boards, though there are boards that will make this worthless.
Realm Taxís cost, other than Peddlerís, is always dependent on actions in play. I would need to specify it only counts actions of the active player like, ďThis costs $1 more per Action card, the current/active player has in playĒ, which sounds awkward. Counting all actions in play seems much simpler and allows for some cute interactions. I like the way it makes you think more carefully about Durations. The top partís wording is to be in accordance with the bottom part.

Quote
Shire
Worth a significant number of Victory points (likely 2VP) and acts effectively as a Smugglers that can be used on any other player's turns. I think it compares too well to Smugglers, especially in multiplayer. I might consider increasing its cost to $5.
Itís no surprise it compares favourably to Smugglers. Smugglers is slow (it doesnít help your current turn), unreliable, imbalanced in multiplayer, not exactly popular, and it costs $1 less. Still thereís one thing about Shire that everybody seems to miss: you have to use Shire immediately after another player gains a card you want, while Smugglers at least gives you a choice among all the cards the player to your right gained last turn.

Quote
Bastion
Probably not worth buying on any board that might have a Supply pile empty. I don't like how this becomes utterly terrible if two Supply piles empty. I would cap the discard to 1 card if any Supply piles are empty to make its effectiveness more even.
Iíve played several games with Bastion and itís really powerful and fast. Those games never ended on piles because Bastion pushes them towards Provinces. Even if thereís one pile empty (usually the Bastion pile), itís still strong. You are underestimating the card.

Quote
Beachcomb
I think this plays too much better than Laboratory most of the time even without its Reaction. With its Reaction, I think this will be incredibly powerful since it can save Remodeled Provinces. Please get rid of that interaction.
Remodel, and most other trash-for-benefit cards, read ďgain a card costing up to X more than the trashed card.Ē As far as I understand it, this means if you use Beachcomb to discard the card you would have trashed with Remodel, you donít gain a card. Beachcomb is supposed to be a counter to the very unpopular family of trashing attacks.
Beachcomb cycles less than Lab and if thereís no discard pile, it just sucks. Being a cantrip doesnít help with that. Still, like Hunting Party, itís often better than Lab but not always, so it costs $5.

Quote
Builder
Battlement
I like Battlement, but I don't like Builder. Builder provides a boring cost reduction since it does not give any of the pieces it needs to make cost reduction exciting and caps prices at a different point than any other official card which causes rules confusion.
Iím not happy with Builderís top part. Itís supposed to be something simple and short. The problem is, those effects are already taken in various forms. Iím considering putting Refugeesí top part, that no one ever talks about, onto Builder if Refugees doesnít work out because itís actually really good.

Quote
Building Crane
This is interesting. One would probably never buy it without some sort of +Buy being available, but that is common enough to not worry about it.
Yeah, BC seems a little too weak to me but I canít think of any other, simple and fitting bonus (other than +buy) on top of +3 Cards, +1 Action. +4 Cards, +1 Action seems too ridiculous.

Quote
Demagogue
I like the idea, mostly because I like naming cards, but I do not like how this encourages a monolithic deck construction for all players. I especially don't like that this discards the card. One is likely to have Copper or Curse the most common card in their deck, so a player will name one of those. If he is wrong, he not only possibly discarded a good card from his deck, he also has to gain a Curse!
Too bad you donít like the idea but the general opinion on Demagogue is positive. Itís certainly more fun than Sea Hag!

Quote
Deposit
This is probably a game decider here since it gives a +Buy. I think I would be more interested if this did not come with the +Buy packaged onto it, but maybe that would make it too weak. I think most of the time players will only store Coppers and then play 4 of them at once for a double Province turn later.
Deposit is soooo slow and weak. Most of the time, it just reads ď+1 Buy, trash a Copper from your hand.Ē I want it to be explosive to account for that. Players usually cash in their Deposits earlier to reach other critical price points. Itís harder to pull off a single megaturn with Deposit compared to Bridge. And when you do, Deposit discharges itself and floods your deck with Treasures (Coppers!) which makes it impossible to do this consistently.

Quote
Draft Horses
I do not think that being able to top deck Actions from your hand is necessary. It would be simpler and largely the same for only digging through the discard pile. I like this one.
Maybe you donít mind terminal collision as much as I do but itís cool you like it anyway!

Quote
Money Launderer
I think the card would look a lot cleaner if its cost increment was a "while this is in play" effect instead since it would get a horizontal rule.
I would increment the cost of Coppers by $2 to make those trash-for-benefit shenanigans more prevalent. I think it would be too hard to play a million Money Launderers.
Itís written like this so the cost increase for Copper can be Throned but so far it was never relevant. I suppose it should increase its cost by $2 and do so while itís in play. Most people would prefer it that way.

Quote
Mediator
This seems pretty alright. I don't like that it uses Coin tokens from Guilds and VP tokens from Prosperity.
This is my fan set. I do what I like. :) No seriously, why would I not use all the resources the original game and expansions provide and utilise their full potential?

Quote
Poacher
Forest Hut
I do not like the Shelter. It is a Dark Ages thing and replacing one of the other Shelters with a Forest Hut seems like a weird starting game decision. I think Poacher is too weak to be useful, even with the ability to open with 2 of them.
What you do is you open with 3 Poachers (Forest Hut helps you do that) and then you have super-labs plus non-terminal trashing, both effects being conditional. I can see people not liking it but itís certainly not weak.

Quote
Provisioner
This is almost certainly too strong. Its effect for you is better than Vault and that card affords a benefit to other players to make it weaker!
Yeah itís pretty powerful! I might limit it to only play one Treasure from your hand. I need to test it more though because I have a theory that Provisioner will choke in almost every deck eventually. Provisioner+BM might just stall when you start greening. I may be mistaken.

Quote
Robber Knight
Weird card. I don't think it would be a lot of fun since you would be left with a high variance deck of Ruins that you can only play by drawing them with your Robber Knight and Golds.
I bet whoever happened to have a handful of Golds collide late in the shuffle would end up winning by overpaying for Robber Knight and getting to trash most of their Ruins and possibly some other junk.
Hmm other people say Robber Knight is (or seems) fun. I personally think it is! Dominion is always luck dependent and sometimes early shuffle luck can be game deciding. Robber Knight doesnít break new grounds here.

Quote
Royalty
I would let the player of Royalty gain a "non-Victory card" rather than "an Action or Treasure." This will always be able to gain at least a $4 but will often be hitting $3+ cards and thus gaining $5, likely often enough to make Royalty worth $5.
Unique and powerful gainer Attack.
ďNon-Victory cardĒ is shorter so why didnít I use that? I donít know but I will change it.

Letís compare Royalty to Jester:
Royalty gives no on-play bonus. Jester gives +$2.
Royalty might have a ďRabbleĒ effect on other players. Jester always discards the top card regardless whether itís of good or bad.
Royalty does not junk other players. Jester might give out Curses or other bad cards.
Most importantly: Royalty only gains one card. Jester may gain as many cards as there are players!

To me this looks like Royalty is sufficiently worse than Jester to be worth $4. Granted, itís still a powerful card for $4 but they canít all be the worst $4 ever ;)

Quote
Suburb
This is a very weak splitter effect that comes with a Reaction to make it better. I think the Reaction could trigger whenever it was discarded "except from Play" and it would still be reasonable.
The only case where that matter would be if you drew dead a Suburb and discard it with your other hand cards during Clean-up, in which case you could also set it aside with your suggestion. Am I correct? It seems worthwhile to make it a little better.

Quote
Valorize
I can understand how this would be super powerful. If you required that the Valorize token be placed upon the card trashed or gained you might be able to limit its power effectively enough.
Interesting idea, although I would have to think of a way to implement this cleanly. Putting the token on the pile of the trashed card (if there is any!) seems awkward. Putting it on the pile of the gained card would require more wordy restrictions because Valorize can gain any card from the Supply but put tokens only on Kingdom piles.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on June 27, 2015, 08:21:55 am
Quote
Suburb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
This is a very weak splitter effect that comes with a Reaction to make it better. I think the Reaction could trigger whenever it was discarded "except from Play" and it would still be reasonable.

It's a Village for $3 that, instead of drawing a card, gives +1$ and a buy. Like its bigger brother Festival, Suburb gets weakened by not drawing a card, but in turn delivers the buy often crucial to engines. I think even without the reaction, this would be okay for $3 (though probably not very good). Your suggestion makes Suburb a Reserve on top of that: Whenever i draw it without a terminal to play, i can just discard it during cleanup, increase my handsize and keep on doing that until i reach a terminal to collide with. Consider this variant:

Suburb, $3
Choose one:
+1 Action, Put this on your tavern mat;
+1$
+1 Buy
+2 Actions
---
At the start of your turn, you may call this, to put it in your hand.

Does the same for many, many cases. It's hardly reasonable for $3, and similar to Coin of the Realm on top of it.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 27, 2015, 08:27:41 am
It's a Village for $3 that, instead of drawing a card, gives +1$ and a buy. Like its bigger brother Festival, Suburb gets weakened by not drawing a card, but in turn delivers the buy often crucial to engines. I think even without the reaction, this would be okay for $3 (though probably not very good). Your suggestion makes Suburb a Reserve on top of that: Whenever i draw it without a terminal to play, i can just discard it during cleanup, increase my handsize and keep on doing that until i reach a terminal to collide with. Consider this variant:

Suburb, $3
Choose one:
+1 Action, Put this on your tavern mat;
+1$
+1 Buy
+2 Actions
---
At the start of your turn, you may call this, to put it in your hand.

Does the same for many, many cases. It's hardly reasonable for $3, and similar to Coin of the Realm on top of it.

Just to make it more well-arranged:

Quote
Suburb, $3, Action/ Reserve
Choose one: +1 Action, Put this on your tavern mat; or +2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1.
At the start of your turn, you may call this, to put it in your hand.

Yes it is similar to CotR. It's a neat alternative idea but Suburb is (also) supposed to be a counter to discard attacks. I should probably just leave it as-is.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Fragasnap on June 27, 2015, 10:19:10 am
Capital
The Action is a cute counterpoint to Mining Village, but is probably a lot more frustrating than it. +2 Cards has a lot more variable value than +$2...
...The +2 Cards bonus is arbitrary and merely replacing its former effect ďYou may gain a Victory card costing up to $1 per Action card you have in playĒ which was ridiculous. I donít see how +2 Cards would be frustrating on a village, though.
+$2 is +$2. You always know exactly what you're getting. +2 Cards can be basically anything. Often when you trash Capital it will be because you are hunting for an Action to play with your +Actions, but you have no guarantee that you will draw one. I might recommend having the card dig for an Action, but that takes so many words and is not necessarily much better since you don't know what you will find.

Quote
Prefect
This seems reasonable, if a little boring. Again, I love the way Victory cards weigh players down and Prefect makes Provinces stronger by removing them immediately and safely from player's decks.
I suppose you donít like Explorer and Tournament, or Crossroads. I havenít really much to say about this version of Prefect, as it hasnít been tested, other than it might be too easy/automatic to do its thing.
Explorer, Tournament, Crossroads, Cellar, Island, Store Room, Warehouse, Vault, Secret Chamber and so on are all ways you can deal with Victory cards in your deck. I don't have a problem with being able to work around Victory card, I have a problem with how easy Prefect makes it since unlike Island and all these other cards, you don't have to line Province up with it first.

Quote
Tollkeeper
This one is pretty cool. Weak enough that it likely won't discourage Silvers, strong enough to be playable after other players have committed to a more money centric strategy. I wonder how often players would avoid playing money centric strategies to counter Tollkeeper.
This cards needs to be tested on games with 3 or more players. I would be happy to get any support, as I mostly get to play with only 1 person.
How do you usually get play testing? If you have some sort of online solution I might consider joining.

Quote
Bog Village
I'm not sure I like the politics and natural luck in the card with players putting Bog Villages into the trash. From experience, the ability to get the "on-trash" effects of cards from the Supply is silly and I recommend wording to get around it.
I am not sure I like the way this can elongate or shorten the game by trashing Kingdom piles indiscriminately. I might like it better if it could only trash and return Bog Villages.
I donít see how Bog Village is luck dependent, even in multiplayer games. Why would you trash a BV from the Supply if you cannot ensure you return it within the same turn?
Harnessing on-trash bonuses from the Supply may be silly but also a lot of fun. And it doesnít seem more game changing to me than, say, Watchtower.
With Bog Village, you can immediately trash a Feodum from the Supply to gain 3 Silvers or a Cultist to make it a super-duper Laboratory.
With Watchtower, you have to have Watchtowers (which is harder than having Bog Villages since Watchtower is terminal), not play the Watchtower so it is in your hand, and then buy a Feodum to trash it to gain 3 Silvers (or buy a Cultist to uselessly draw 3 cards).
I do not believe that these two events are comparable in power.

Bog Village possibly becomes luck dependent based upon what is in the Trash and Supply when your turn starts. I think I am overestimating how often that will matter.

Quote
Realm Tax
Realm Tax should really count "Actions you have in play" rather than any Action in play since it counts other player's Durations as written. This is probably fun on most boards, though there are boards that will make this worthless.
Realm Taxís cost, other than Peddlerís, is always dependent on actions in play. I would need to specify it only counts actions of the active player like, ďThis costs $1 more per Action card, the current/active player has in playĒ, which sounds awkward. Counting all actions in play seems much simpler and allows for some cute interactions. I like the way it makes you think more carefully about Durations. The top partís wording is to be in accordance with the bottom part.
Only counting the cards you have in play is standard wording.
Quote
Peddler
Types: Action
Cost: $8*
+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.
During your Buy phase, this costs $2 less per Action card you have in play, but not less than $0.
Quote
Horn of Plenty
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
$0. When you play this, gain a card costing up to $1 per differently named card you have in play, counting this. If it's a Victory card, trash this.

Quote
Provisioner
This is almost certainly too strong. Its effect for you is better than Vault and that card affords a benefit to other players to make it weaker!
Yeah itís pretty powerful! I might limit it to only play one Treasure from your hand. I need to test it more though because I have a theory that Provisioner will choke in almost every deck eventually. Provisioner+BM might just stall when you start greening. I may be mistaken.
Won't Provisioner prevent its own stalling out since it keeps giving you Silvers?

Quote
Beachcomb
I think this plays too much better than Laboratory most of the time even without its Reaction. With its Reaction, I think this will be incredibly powerful since it can save Remodeled Provinces. Please get rid of that interaction.
Remodel, and most other trash-for-benefit cards, read ďgain a card costing up to X more than the trashed card.Ē As far as I understand it, this means if you use Beachcomb to discard the card you would have trashed with Remodel, you donít gain a card. Beachcomb is supposed to be a counter to the very unpopular family of trashing attacks.
Beachcomb cycles less than Lab and if thereís no discard pile, it just sucks. Being a cantrip doesnít help with that. Still, like Hunting Party, itís often better than Lab but not always, so it costs $5.
True: It reacts to "when you would trash." I was not paying close enough attention.

Quote
Royalty
I would let the player of Royalty gain a "non-Victory card" rather than "an Action or Treasure." This will always be able to gain at least a $4 but will often be hitting $3+ cards and thus gaining $5, likely often enough to make Royalty worth $5.
Unique and powerful gainer Attack.
ďNon-Victory cardĒ is shorter so why didnít I use that? I donít know but I will change it.

Letís compare Royalty to Jester:
Royalty gives no on-play bonus. Jester gives +$2.
Royalty might have a ďRabbleĒ effect on other players. Jester always discards the top card regardless whether itís of good or bad.
Royalty does not junk other players. Jester might give out Curses or other bad cards.
Most importantly: Royalty only gains one card. Jester may gain as many cards as there are players!

To me this looks like Royalty is sufficiently worse than Jester to be worth $4. Granted, itís still a powerful card for $4 but they canít all be the worst $4 ever ;)
Jester flips a card and, whatever that is, someone gets it. Royalty hunts to find a valuable card and then gives the owner of it free choice of any (non-Victory) card that costs $2 more than it. I think Royalty will quite often give the player of it free reign to gain $5 cards and that flexibility of choice makes it a whole lot stronger than Jester's "everyone probably gets a Copper."

Quote
Suburb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
This is a very weak splitter effect that comes with a Reaction to make it better. I think the Reaction could trigger whenever it was discarded "except from Play" and it would still be reasonable.
...Does the same for many, many cases. It's hardly reasonable for $3, and similar to Coin of the Realm on top of it.
With Coin of the Realm, you get $1 non-terminally and then get to call it later for effectively +3 Actions. To "put Suburb onto your Tavern mat" you have to pay for it first in hand-size and coin. I don't know if it would be unreasonable, but having played with a +2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1 at a cost of $3, I can confirm that this vanilla splitter effect is nothing to write home about.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on June 27, 2015, 11:13:13 am
Your concerns about most cards make sense. Some of them, with respect to power level, are assumptions that might change the more you experience a card for yourself. I am also willing to change my cards, particularly Royalty, if they turn out to be overpowered or otherwise problematic. Royalty might only gain a card sharing a type with a card it hit, so it would be terrible when it hit Silvers. I don't know... Royalty is complicated as it does multiple things and does not want to be too good at either.
I might change Prefect in a way that it's harder to line it up with a Province but I like the general idea of it.

About Realm Tax, here's an example of why the wording of Peddler and HoP doesn't always work:
I have 3 Actions in play, the third being Swindler. You trash the top card of your deck which is a Realm Tax. You have 0 Actions in play, so it costs 0. I want to buy a Realm Tax in the same turn and it costs $3 for me. It would have a different cost for the active player than for the other players. It would get even more confusing with an attack like Royalty. I find this more bothersome than counting the actions of other players which would be a unique player interaction.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on June 27, 2015, 06:24:06 pm
Quote
Quote
Quote
Suburb
Types: Action, Reaction
Cost: $3
+2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1.
When you discard this other than during Clean-Up, you may set it aside. If you do, at the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
This is a very weak splitter effect that comes with a Reaction to make it better. I think the Reaction could trigger whenever it was discarded "except from Play" and it would still be reasonable.
...Does the same for many, many cases. It's hardly reasonable for $3, and similar to Coin of the Realm on top of it.
With Coin of the Realm, you get $1 non-terminally and then get to call it later for effectively +3 Actions. To "put Suburb onto your Tavern mat" you have to pay for it first in hand-size and coin. I don't know if it would be unreasonable, but having played with a +2 Actions, +1 Buy, +$1 at a cost of $3, I can confirm that this vanilla splitter effect is nothing to write home about.

Your suggestion was that you can add Suburb to your next hand if you didn't play it. As it is not topdecked, but set aside and added, it does not affect your action count or hand size besides on the first turn you draw it (like a nonterminal Reserve would). I really, really don't get where "you have to pay for it first in hand-size and coin" comes from. I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be a good 3$, but it's a nice engine component (for those of us who like engines) and certainly can do with a little extra. That extra doesn't have to be something as big as making it a pseudo-Reserve, though.

Edit: I see you did a similar thing with your own Leper Village, which also has a bonus that overdoes it. Not all cards can be powerhouses. Village and Festival aren't on their own, but they are very useful when used correctly.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 03, 2015, 06:13:20 am
I noticed my set is starting to bust at the seams, hence I will sort out some cards and put them in an extra thread. Roots and Renewal should only contain cards that at least fit one of the themes or fill in a gap (so the set has a good number of draw cards, villages, attacks etc.).

The following cards will be taken out of the set: Demagogue, Draft Horses, Mediator, Prefect, Routing, Suburb (mainly because I have too many villages, see below) and Tollkeeper. I'm adding two more villages: Orphanage and Manor, whereas the latter is a replacement for Capital. It still does basically the same thing with Estates which is all I care about. But the rest of you was right in that being able to play a Province as Hunting Grounds is pretty bonkers.

(http://i.imgur.com/qF8XiZR.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/RrSCSDx.png)

Hmm, Manor might also say "You may gain an Estate. If you do, play it." Otherwise it's pretty weak for a village+.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Haddock on July 03, 2015, 06:27:12 am
Hmm, Manor might also say "You may gain an Estate. If you do, play it." Otherwise it's pretty weak for a village+.
Is it?  It feels pretty decent to me.  A village which is your choice of 3 things - vanilla Village, point-gaining Lab, point-gaining Market Square.  In that late game that feels pretty strong to me, I dunno.  I don't think it's OP, but I wouldn't say it's weak.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 03, 2015, 06:27:17 am
I want to apply Fragasnap's suggestion for Money Lender and see if you can actually get the trash-Copper-for-benefit thing to work this way.

(http://i.imgur.com/pXilAbA.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on July 03, 2015, 09:15:13 am
I want to apply Fragasnap's suggestion for Money Lender and see if you can actually get the trash-Copper-for-benefit thing to work this way.

The funny thing is, Money Lender actually is trash-Copper-for-benefit.

Also, i allready mentioned this to you, but i like Orphanage and how bittersweetly antithematic it is to Prosperity, the set where VP tokens are from. I am still not sure whether being able to gain a Silver to the top of your deck for less than a normal Silver isn't too good, but then again you additionally gain that Necropolis+ (which, on the other hand, suffers less from its "only once per turn" VP gaining in a treasure deck where you're not going to play multiple per turn anyhow). So, not sure whether the use case "Orphanage supported big Money" is a thing, but probably not.In general, i'm not sure how strong the card is, but given that gain and play effect don't necessarily come together, it might be fine.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ChocophileBenj on July 03, 2015, 09:24:24 am
I personally would have removed the "first time" thing, I'm not sure it brings much to the game, and I find rather funny the silver on top of your deck cheaper than a silver, though you would obviously buy silver over this sometimes because you don't always need that silver flood... but it's a fine card !

Manor is truly cool, but I would slightly reword it, for instance for Inheritance (which may be broken with this by the way).
Maybe : "Estates are action/victory cards with no action effect by default. When you play an estate, choose one first : +1 card or +1 buy."
EDIT : Well, I'd actually make Estates effects just a bit stronger just in case you draw them with no village (and no manor) for instance. Such as "+2 cards discard a card" (I don't think it would be utterly broken, would it ?) or "+1 buy +$1", because buys love $, too. And would mean 5/3 openings for everyone...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: horatio83 on July 03, 2015, 09:24:36 am
First of all, I like Orphanage. Far too few fan cards which use coin and VP tokens so thumbs up.  :)

Second, Orphanage feels good without the gain bonus. If you buy it during the first two moves I guess you will play it on average 6-8 times (anything but an educated guess, I never thought about how often you shuffle on average) so it is a no-brainer to buy one early.

Third, with the gain bonus the card is IMO overpowered and becomes even more of a forced buy as you increase your money next turn by 1-2. If you started with 2/5 you can buy a 6$ card at move 2 and if you start with 3/4 you can buy a 5$ or 6$ (if the silver substitutes an estate/shelter) card at move two if you purchase orphange at move 1.

I don't think that there should be a 2$ card which is an automatic buy (it might be worthwhile to point out that this is different from Baker which passively modifies the two opening moves) on the first move in 50% of the games and independent of the deck (there are rarely decks in which there are no decent 5$ cards).
So you might wanna consider to get rid of the silver gain (or change it such that the gained silver is not top-decked).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 04, 2015, 02:52:16 pm
First of all, I like Orphanage. Far too few fan cards which use coin and VP tokens so thumbs up.  :)

Second, Orphanage feels good without the gain bonus. If you buy it during the first two moves I guess you will play it on average 6-8 times (anything but an educated guess, I never thought about how often you shuffle on average) so it is a no-brainer to buy one early.

Third, with the gain bonus the card is IMO overpowered and becomes even more of a forced buy as you increase your money next turn by 1-2. If you started with 2/5 you can buy a 6$ card at move 2 and if you start with 3/4 you can buy a 5$ or 6$ (if the silver substitutes an estate/shelter) card at move two if you purchase orphange at move 1.

I don't think that there should be a 2$ card which is an automatic buy (it might be worthwhile to point out that this is different from Baker which passively modifies the two opening moves) on the first move in 50% of the games and independent of the deck (there are rarely decks in which there are no decent 5$ cards).
So you might wanna consider to get rid of the silver gain (or change it such that the gained silver is not top-decked).

Thanks for the feedback. I am sure Orphanage is too weak without an on-gain bonus. I definitely want something that topdecks a Silver on-gain. With that said, I totally missed how overpowered that is in a 2-5 (even a 3-4) opening so I agree with you it's too powerful in the opening. With such a good on-gain bonus, it should at least cost 3 and that's what I will try. The on-play effect is certainly too weak for a $3-cost, and that's good because I want players to buy Orphanage to harness its on-gain bonus (but not for that).

I personally would have removed the "first time" thing, I'm not sure it brings much to the game, and I find rather funny the silver on top of your deck cheaper than a silver, though you would obviously buy silver over this sometimes because you don't always need that silver flood... but it's a fine card !

Manor is truly cool, but I would slightly reword it, for instance for Inheritance (which may be broken with this by the way).
Maybe : "Estates are action/victory cards with no action effect by default. When you play an estate, choose one first : +1 card or +1 buy."
EDIT : Well, I'd actually make Estates effects just a bit stronger just in case you draw them with no village (and no manor) for instance. Such as "+2 cards discard a card" (I don't think it would be utterly broken, would it ?) or "+1 buy +$1", because buys love $, too. And would mean 5/3 openings for everyone...

Orphanage needs the "first time" clause because I consider a non-terminal and unconditional VP gainer bad design.

You are right about Manor. Its predecessor, Capital, had the wording "You may play Estates as if they were Action cards, ..." to avoid confusion with Inheritance and I should revert to that. Otoh, the wording you suggested isn't bad either.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 09:38:14 am
Okay, so Orphanage needs to cost at least $3. Maybe the on-gain bonus alone even justifies a cost of $4 but then its on-play effect would feel pretty awful. I am reluctant to make it a regular village, though. We will just test it like this for now and see whether it's overpowered in the opening.

When you play an inherited Estate with Manor in the game, with this wording, I think what happens is you choose +1 Card or +1 Buy first and then do what the inherited Estate does. Or do you get to choose the order in which you execute those two thngs?

(http://i.imgur.com/ihD2MIJ.png)   (http://i.imgur.com/y2GiXGS.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Haddock on July 05, 2015, 01:08:57 pm
When you play an inherited Estate with Manor in the game, with this wording, I think what happens is you choose +1 Card or +1 Buy first and then do what the inherited Estate does. Or do you get to choose the order in which you execute those two thngs?
I think you would do the +1 Card or whatever first.  But I think you want it to become an Action type as well, right?

So the text you want might be "In games using this, Estates gain the Action type, and may be played for your choice of +1 Card or +1 Buy."  For the sake of things like Ironworks.  (Or do you want them not to be Action-Victory?)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: horatio83 on July 05, 2015, 01:36:17 pm
Orphanage needs the "first time" clause because I consider a non-terminal and unconditional VP gainer bad design.
May I ask why? I recently designed such a card (Grand Market variant that costs 8$) and while I am not sure about its proper price of it I fail to see why this should in general be a problem.
I would e.g. not claim that a card which converts all 3/4 openings into 3/5-6 openings is a bad design. I think it is pretty strong and definitely not appropriate for Orphanage as it makes the first move of 5/12 of all games with Orphanage scripted ... but the idea in and of itself is fine.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 01:42:45 pm
When you play an inherited Estate with Manor in the game, with this wording, I think what happens is you choose +1 Card or +1 Buy first and then do what the inherited Estate does. Or do you get to choose the order in which you execute those two thngs?
I think you would do the +1 Card or whatever first.  But I think you want it to become an Action type as well, right?

So the text you want might be "In games using this, Estates gain the Action type, and may be played for your choice of +1 Card or +1 Buy."  For the sake of things like Ironworks.  (Or do you want them not to be Action-Victory?)

I think I don't want them to be Action/Victory cards to limit their interactions with cards that refer to Action cards.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Awaclus on July 05, 2015, 01:53:34 pm
Orphanage needs the "first time" clause because I consider a non-terminal and unconditional VP gainer bad design.
May I ask why? I recently designed such a card (Grand Market variant that costs 8$) and while I am not sure about its proper price of it I fail to see why this should in general be a problem.

It's a problem because it can create situations in which no player has an incentive to ever end the game.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 02:17:53 pm
Orphanage needs the "first time" clause because I consider a non-terminal and unconditional VP gainer bad design.
May I ask why? I recently designed such a card (Grand Market variant that costs 8$) and while I am not sure about its proper price of it I fail to see why this should in general be a problem.

It's a problem because it can create situations in which no player has an incentive to ever end the game.

Precisely. Even if such a situation rarely occurs, it still would be way too easy to amass VP this way.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: horatio83 on July 05, 2015, 02:28:20 pm
Precisely. Even if such a situation rarely occurs, it still would be way too easy to amass VP this way.
I designed my Grand Market variant that grants a VP token at a price of 8 and never considered to make a cheap cantrip VP gainer. So while this theoretical possibility exists it is practially irrelevant if the respective card is expensive enough (in the case of my card it has to be directly compared with Province).
Furthermore Goons is terminal and frequently leads to massive VP token piles. Not just in theory but in practice. Would you also call Goons a bad design?

My problem with your card is ironically precisely that it will gift the player who buys it at turn 1 far too many VP tokens (probably more than my 8 card will in an average game) over the course of the game which makes it IMO an automatic buy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 02:33:26 pm
Precisely. Even if such a situation rarely occurs, it still would be way too easy to amass VP this way.
I designed my Grand Market variant that grants a VP token at a price of 8 and never considered to make a cheap cantrip VP gainer. So while this theoretical possibility exists it is practially irrelevant if the respective card is expensive enough (in the case of my card it has to be directly compared with Province).
Furthermore Goons is terminal and frequently leads to massive VP token piles. Would you also call Goons a bad design?

My problem with your card is ironically precisely that it will gift the player who buys it at turn 1 far too many VP tokens (probably more than my 8 card will in an average game) over the course of the game which makes it IMO an automatic buy.

You may be right. We will see after testing. Orphanage is still untested.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: XerxesPraelor on July 05, 2015, 08:17:29 pm
Goons is not bad design because it requires you to buy cards to get points, which puts a time limit on the game.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 08:29:26 pm
Goons is not bad design because it requires you to buy cards to get points, which puts a time limit on the game.

I hope you're not implying that I stated Goons was bad design.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: XerxesPraelor on July 05, 2015, 08:41:18 pm
Goons is not bad design because it requires you to buy cards to get points, which puts a time limit on the game.

I hope you're not implying that I stated Goons was bad design.

No, I was talking to Horatio. Sorry about being off-topic.

Re: Orphanage
Perhaps making it cost $4 would make opening with it not too dominant. As-is, it looks like it is the correct first-turn buy in all cases with any good $5, and I think you want there to be interesting choices. If you had the silver go at the bottom of your deck instead, it would still be interesting to use as you would be guaranteed to have the silver on turn 3, so if you test it and it turns out to be dominant, you could try that change instead of the obvious $3-$4 change.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 05, 2015, 09:37:30 pm
We just had a game with Orphanage costing $3 and we both opened with it. on a 3-4 opening you are guaranteed to hit $5 next turn but there are other cards that do that, too. The chance to hit $6 is only 20% and on most boards that's probably irrelevant, anyway. We only bought one additional Orphanage each because too many Orphanages wouldn't have helped our decks at all. So $3 seemed but we'll keep testing, of course.

Manor worked nicely so far. There were some nice combos with cards that care about hand size.

Fragasnap pointed out to me that Money Launderer might be too strong for $2 due to its flexibility. It can pseudo-trash all Coppers in your hand, give you +$2 and make Copper a good target for tfb, all of that non-terminally. So I should probably try it at $3 which is a little frustrating as it would leave me with only one card in the set costing $2 - Poacher. Although Realm Tax technically counts as the basic cost is $0*.

I barely played with Bastion in games with 3 or more players so I might have overestimated the card due to its power in 2-player games. Fragasnap suggested to limit its discard clause to 1 card if there is at least one empty supply pile so it scales better in multiplayer games.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ChocophileBenj on July 06, 2015, 05:34:33 am
Quote
Orphanage needs the "first time" clause because I consider a non-terminal and unconditional VP gainer bad design.

To make it clear, I meant to remove the whole VP gain.
I should be clearer sometimes.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on February 16, 2016, 05:18:12 pm
Hello everyone! This thread has been basically dead for months but meanwhile I kept working on Roots and Renewal, took out some cards, added others, and playtested a lot (big thanks to Asper for so many games I can't even count). Finally, I've done a complete overhaul of the opening post of this thread. Please check it out (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11563.msg406369#msg406369) to see the current state of the set with all the cards that are considered part of it. You may find older cards that are still playable in my second thread here: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13625.msg512473#msg512473

Here's the most novel thing: I'm trying out a new mechanic for a few cards that use the so-called Prime token. The Prime token sits on an Action Supply pile (once it has been moved there) and affects all cards from that pile regardless of where they are. It increases their cost by $1. Now I know effects like this have been suggested countless times and we know all the potential confusion that comes with cost-reducers but hear me out!

The Prime token overrides all previous, current and future cost reductions of cards from the pile it is placed on and annuls them as long as it's staying there. As soon as the Prime token is removed from that pile, this effect is made void retroactively, meaning that all past and current cost reductions now apply to cards from that pile even if they are result of resolving cards that have been played when the Prime token was still there.

(http://i.imgur.com/bejAy2Z.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/V4xx0M0.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/SRmVpJb.png)

Quote
Revaluate, $5, Action
Move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and their cost canít be reduced. Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

Quote
Capital, $6, Victory
Worth 2 VP for every 2 different costs of the Action cards in your deck (rounded down).
When you gain this, move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and their cost canít be reduced.

Quote
Salesman, $2, Action/ Reserve
Move the Prime token an Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile cost $1 more and their cost canít be reduced. Put this on your Tavern mat.
At the start of your turn, you may call this. If you do, all cards cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0.

Revaluate has been tested a bunch and it seems to work out so far. The mid-turn cost changes allow some cute interactions with other trash-for-benefit cards although the main use is to turn itself into a Graverobber for a specific action card.

Capital has gotten a little testing but not enough to see if it's often enough a worthwhile strategy to go for. The way it counts points it can benefit a lot from its on-gain effect. But you might just pick one up to mess with the cost of a card your opponent is planning to do stuff with.

Salesman hasn't been tested, yet. Originally it was supposed to be a reaction but there were some issues in theory coming with using the Prime token when another player would buy a card that I couldn't solve. This reserve version has nothing to do with that but it should work out. I hope it will be fun, too.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal - check out all the new stuff!
Post by: ConMan on February 16, 2016, 07:20:47 pm
Interesting. I'm not sure what more I can say about that.

It reminds me a little of an odd rule from the old Star Wars CCG, by Decipher. The rule was that if a variety of effects modified a number by increasing and decreasing it, then they all stacked. But if an effect set a value, then it was fixed and no longer affected by any other modifiers. So for example "reduce the card's cost by one" and "increase the card's cost by one" would cancel each other, but "the card's cost is now 2" and "increase the card's cost by one" resulted in a cost of 2, regardless of the order the effects occurred. I definitely prefer having it stated on the cards that the cost is now unchangeable, because you actually had to know that rule in SWCCG and actually notice when it took effect.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal - check out all the new stuff!
Post by: tristan on March 18, 2016, 07:00:50 am
Cannot say anything about the cost increase mechanism but I like the Victoy part of Capital. It is a bit like Fairgrounds in terms of forcing you to buy stuff you would not want otherwise. It is fairly easy to reach 4VP but in order to get 6VP you will have to work a bit like with Fairgrounds. I think the main difference is that Capital is more board-dependent, i.e. when there are only Action cards that cost 2-5 with one additional "non-standard" cost [1,6,7 and 8] you have to settle for 4VP whereas with Fairgrounds you can technically always reach 6VP. If there are 6 different Action card prices  it is easier to hit 6VP whereas with Fairgrounds you gotta work harder.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: stechafle on March 26, 2016, 09:39:00 am
I play-tested 3 of these cards recently. All were an enjoyable addition to the game. Specifically:

Orphanage
I own Prosperity so always am excited by cards that use the VP tokens. I bought this with my first $3 to get the Silver on top of deck. Kingdom included Chapel so I managed to get 11 vp from this. I still lost the game by 6vp to my wife who skipped this so I think concerns about this being too automatic may be unwarranted.

Deposit
Fun card. Made for fast game due to quick Copper clearing. Might need to cost $4. With village/throne room, very likely to play Gold for $6.

Realm Tax
We put this in a kingdom with Market and Peddler to let it shine. I love the tension the card creates between buying it for cheap when it's not worth much to you and waiting until you can play at least 4 Action cards in a turn at which point it is more expensive to buy but more useful to you.

Thanks again for your creativity!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 27, 2016, 07:50:23 am
Although I currently don't find the time to design and test cards myself, I am still happy to see that other people are enjoying my cards and I will continue to read all the feedback. Thank you for testing! :)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on March 27, 2016, 04:06:09 pm
Did Money Launderer get cut?  I was looking for the most recent version of it and didn't find it here or your 'CL's other cards' thread.
I've played at least one game with it a while back. It seemed okay, but not great. I wanted to give it another try because I like the idea of it, so I came to make sure I had the most recent version.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on March 27, 2016, 04:14:31 pm
Yes, Money Launderer got cut from the set because it mostly filled the same design space as Deposit but Deposit is a generally more useful and flexible and I like it more. Money Launderer's Copper cost-increase didn't really go anywhere. The potential combos for this were way too slow. But I'm gonna upload ML in my other thread because it's still an okay card as-is even without the effect below the line.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on March 27, 2016, 04:27:58 pm
Yes, Money Launderer got cut from the set because it mostly filled the same design space as Deposit but Deposit is a generally more useful and flexible and I like it more. Money Launderer's Copper cost-increase didn't really go anywhere. The potential combos for this were way too slow. But I'm gonna upload ML in my other thread because it's still an okay card as-is even without the effect below the line.
The cost increase on copper was my favorite part of the card. I did a card with a similar concept (Collectables) and it works pretty well. Seems like it should work on Money Launderer too.

Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Doom_Shark on July 03, 2016, 01:37:44 am
Would deposit be too different than your original intentions as an Action-Treasure similar to crown? Something like:
Quote
+1 buy
If this is played during your action phase, you may put any number of treasures from your hand onto your deposit mat. If this is played during your buy phase, you may play a treasure from your deposit mat twice.
It avoids the playing treasures in your action phase shenanigans, but also makes it possible to stack. Admittedly, that doesn't really do anything unless you want to save it for a future turn, but it is something to consider. Also, with it's current wording, Depositing crown turns deposit  into a throned throne with a +buy. Don't know if that's too powerful or not, but the alternate option suggested would avoid that as well.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on July 03, 2016, 05:06:29 am
Would deposit be too different than your original intentions as an Action-Treasure similar to crown? Something like:
Quote
+1 buy
If this is played during your action phase, you may put any number of treasures from your hand onto your deposit mat. If this is played during your buy phase, you may play a treasure from your deposit mat twice.
It avoids the playing treasures in your action phase shenanigans, but also makes it possible to stack. Admittedly, that doesn't really do anything unless you want to save it for a future turn, but it is something to consider. Also, with it's current wording, Depositing crown turns deposit  into a throned throne with a +buy. Don't know if that's too powerful or not, but the alternate option suggested would avoid that as well.

That would make Deposit stronger in the first place (since playing it during your buy phase wouldn't cost an action). That might still be okay at $4, though. Otherwise it's a pretty slow card. It would still be slow as a pseudo-trasher but much stronger as payload. I actually like that currently it can play Treausres during your action phase but Provisioner also does that and there it synergises with the rest of the card. Crown's existence is probably a good reason to make Deposit an Action-Treasure to avoid confusion with Crown played via Deposit during your Action phase. I will think about it.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 04, 2016, 11:58:06 am
I have updated the OP yet again. Here's what's new:

(http://i.imgur.com/G8NpzGK.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/X0J7WpL.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/8pXzI8z.png)    (http://i.imgur.com/ahzSEud.png)

Bootlegger is now part of this set to fill the vacant $2-slot as it fits thematically. It still needs more testing, though. It could previously be seen in my other cards thread (link in my signature).

Bog Village is a very old card that was part of Roots and Renewal in its early day, then out for a long time. Now it's back to replace Manor as a Village which I don't like that much anymore since Inheritance came around. I think Bog Village has a lot of unexplored potential and I want to give it another shot in this set which is where it really belongs.

Orphanage existed for a while as a $3 version that didn't give +1 Card but with the Silver bonus felt a touch too good in the opening. I'm going to test this version because I hope it makes the decision when to buy Orphanage less trivial while keeping it a good enough card in general.

Riverside was previously named Capital and had a different picture. It remained functionally the same card, though.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Doom_Shark on August 04, 2016, 01:36:54 pm
I really like riverside. I think the interesting thing about it is the improtance of getting the last one, which is just as important as winning the split, if not more so. The reason being that by gaining the last one, you can either:
1) Add another cost tier to your deck, or
2) Remove a cost tier from your opponent's deck.
Of course, the second option only works if there is a cost teir that they only bought one card from, like their only $3 cards being villages, AND they have cards from the next tier. Without glancing back at the OP, this is probably my favorite card in the set.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: GendoIkari on August 04, 2016, 01:43:10 pm
Wording suggestion on Riverside:

"Worth 2 vp for every 2 differently cost action cards in your deck."

Also, it doesn't seem that "worth 2 for every 2" is really different enough from "worth 1 for every"...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 04, 2016, 02:43:29 pm
Wording suggestion on Riverside:

"Worth 2 vp for every 2 differently cost action cards in your deck."

Also, it doesn't seem that "worth 2 for every 2" is really different enough from "worth 1 for every"...

I think the difference is significant enough as it can be worth 4VP or 6VP but not 5VP. This makes the decision where to put the Prime token more important than otherwise. Your suggested wording doesn't seem clear enough to me. Looking at Keep, "Worth 2VP per 2 differently cost action cards you have a copy of" seems legit.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: tristan on August 04, 2016, 05:36:40 pm
Orphanage seems to be too strong. Even if you don't need a village you want some 'once per turn cantrip VP token gainers' in your deck. And with an on-gain topdecked Silver on top of it will very often be an opening autobuy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 04, 2016, 05:44:20 pm
Orphanage seems to be too strong. Even if you don't need a village you want some 'once per turn cantrip VP token gainers' in your deck. And with an on-gain topdecked Silver on top of it will very often be an opening autobuy.

Do you think this version would be fine? Or should it cost $4 without the +card?

(http://i.imgur.com/30z4G1b.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: tristan on August 04, 2016, 05:52:51 pm
Orphanage seems to be too strong. Even if you don't need a village you want some 'once per turn cantrip VP token gainers' in your deck. And with an on-gain topdecked Silver on top of it will very often be an opening autobuy.

Do you think this version would be fine? Or should it cost $4 without the +card?

(http://i.imgur.com/30z4G1b.png)
I have a hard time judging this. On the first glance it seems better than Silver but you might not want that many Necros with a small bonus in your deck. For example I wouldn't know if I should buy this in a 3/4 opening.

About Bootleger, I like it. On play it is a tad better than Stonemason (and you might very well just buy it for 2; unlike Stonemason the strength of its on play effect matches its price) but unlike with Stonemason you run a serious risk of e.g. getting a bad 5$ if you pay 7 for it.
Perhaps you might wanna consider restricting it to Kingdom Supply or Action cards (unless you intended it to only work well if you overpay 3,4 or 6)? Otherwise the other player will always name Duchy if you overpay 5.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 04, 2016, 07:47:48 pm
About Bootleger, I like it. On play it is a tad better than Stonemason (and you might very well just buy it for 2; unlike Stonemason the strength of its on play effect matches its price) but unlike with Stonemason you run a serious risk of e.g. getting a bad 5$ if you pay 7 for it.
Perhaps you might wanna consider restricting it to Kingdom Supply or Action cards (unless you intended it to only work well if you overpay 3,4 or 6)? Otherwise the other player will always name Duchy if you overpay 5.

That's intended. Since the player buying Bootlegger usually doesn't have any influence on which two cards are chosen for him (unless there are only two different cards of the appropriate cost) I don't think other players naming Duchy and something else would be an issue as the buying player can always gain the other card that isn't the Duchy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on August 04, 2016, 08:04:36 pm
I really like Bootlegger. It's the perfect card to pick up if you notice you're producing too much money with too little +Buy. Works nice on Province, Gold and Potion costs, but should be fine for $5s, too. If there really is a $5 kingdom card you really don't want at all, you can just pick up Bootlegger earlier.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on August 04, 2016, 08:08:34 pm
I like Bootlegger and I like the change to Orphanage. I don't think being a village that's also worth getting in BM makes it too strong.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: tristan on August 04, 2016, 10:00:33 pm
Works nice on Province, Gold and Potion costs, but should be fine for $5s, too.
Now that you mention it I really think that it should be restricted to Action or Kingdom cards. Two Provinces for 10$ or two Colonies for 13$ seems a bit crazy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on August 04, 2016, 10:02:15 pm
Works nice on Province, Gold and Potion costs, but should be fine for $5s, too.
Now that you mention it I really think that it should be restricted to Action or Kingdom cards. Two Provinces for 10$ or two Colonies for 13$ seems a bit crazy.
Bootlegger only gains you one card.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 04, 2016, 10:02:57 pm
Works nice on Province, Gold and Potion costs, but should be fine for $5s, too.
Now that you mention it I really think that it should be restricted to Action or Kigndom cards. Two Provinces for 10$ or two Colonies for 13$ seems a bit crazy.

Maybe you should read the card more carefully ;)

(http://i.imgur.com/G8NpzGK.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: tristan on August 04, 2016, 10:10:55 pm
Oops, sorry.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 05, 2016, 05:23:17 am
I wonder how I didn't notice this earlier but Bootlegger has an important design flaw; it helps you pick up multiple cards via overpay but you sacrifice control over your choices while it also gives you additional buys on play so you can just buy the cards you need regularly. The on-play and on-gain effects contradict each other. To fix that I would make the overpay more attractive, like
Quote
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, the player to your left chooses 2 differently named cards in the Supply, each costing $1 more than you overpaid. Gain one of the named cards.
For example, you could buy Bootlegger, overpay $4 for one of two $5-cost cards your opponent chooses for you, which is probably still worse than just buying the $5-cost you need directly, even if you spent $6 on it. We used Bootlegger's overpay option a bit in our test games but it was probably just for the fun of it. In practise this effect is pretty bad (compare with Contraband) and overpaying will almost never be worth it unless it gets buffed even further, e.g. if the chosen cards cost $2 more than you overpaid so that the Bootlegger is basically free.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on August 05, 2016, 11:32:19 am
I wonder how I didn't notice this earlier but Bootlegger has an important design flaw; it helps you pick up multiple cards via overpay but you sacrifice control over your choices while it also gives you additional buys on play so you can just buy the cards you need regularly. The on-play and on-gain effects contradict each other. To fix that I would make the overpay more attractive, like
Quote
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, the player to your left chooses 2 differently named cards in the Supply, each costing $1 more than you overpaid. Gain one of the named cards.
For example, you could buy Bootlegger, overpay $4 for one of two $5-cost cards your opponent chooses for you, which is probably still worse than just buying the $5-cost you need directly, even if you spent $6 on it. We used Bootlegger's overpay option a bit in our test games but it was probably just for the fun of it. In practise this effect is pretty bad (compare with Contraband) and overpaying will almost never be worth it unless it gets buffed even further, e.g. if the chosen cards cost $2 more than you overpaid so that the Bootlegger is basically free.

I thought this "flaw" was the idea behind Bootlegger... Build an Alchemist stack, realize you didn't get your +Buy yet, pay 5$P, get your buy without skipping Alchemist. Or any other situation where you want to include more +Buy into your deck without foregoing whatever you are actually after. The "$11 for Herbalist" thing. I guess my fix would have been to make Bootlegger a 1-card Stonemason to even push the redundancy, but of course that would get close to having to cost $3...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on August 05, 2016, 01:32:47 pm
I would rather have the player interaction in it because I like that part in particular. Let's try a version that let's you overpay e.g. $3 to gain one of two $5-cost cards of your opponents choice. You would pay $5 in total for a $5-card you can't entirely choose and a free Bootlegger. That might be okay.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 26, 2016, 08:11:55 pm
So umm, Poacher?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 22, 2017, 09:23:53 am
I am back!

After a long break from Dominion and its community, and with Nocturne around the corner, I'm celebrating my comeback with a revision of Roots and Renewal! There are a lot of aesthetic and text updates, and functional changes to several of my cards. I will introduce them in small, thematic groups within the next days. Come, partake in this joyous occasion and leave lots of feedback! Here is the first bunch of changes:

(https://i.imgur.com/8NZd6sa.png)
This card just doesn't do it for me anymore. Lurker utilizes this mechanic in a far more elegant way. Bog Village just had it tacked-on for the sake of having a village and a card that moves cards between trash an Supply. With a complete overhaul of the villages in my set (more on that soon) and Petty Lord already letting you tactically return cards from the trash to the Supply, Bog Village in its latest form is utterly dead. I might utilize the mechanic on some new card that's part of a split pile, but only if it feels unique enough.

(https://i.imgur.com/CjdBDr9.png)
The old Beachcomb didn't work very well because its being a cantrip sometimes triggered an unwanted shuffle so it couldn't increase your handsize. This new version is supposed to always give you at least two cards to pick from (to justify its high cost) but it's untested and I have no idea whether it's going to be good enough or fun to play with. The reaction was changed (again) so that the trashed card visits the trash, then is discarded.

(https://i.imgur.com/sdFUclL.png)
I removed the "Gain a Silver" clause because we found that Provisioner is already pretty good without it. The rest of the card remains unchanged.

(https://i.imgur.com/0SPtTza.png)
Poacher has been renamed to Trapper but otherwise remains the same. There's an errata for it, however: In a game with Shelters, every player replaces the same Shelter (that wasn chosen at random) with a Forest Hut, in case that wasn't obvious.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2017, 10:12:13 am
Yaaaaay!!! Co0kieL0rd is back! ;D

I like all the changes, except that Beachcomb is now strictly better than Lab (the possibly empty discard pile kept that from being the case before). The option to delay the shuffle, pick from other cards and the reaction easily make this 6$ territory. And then there's the fact that it can counter topdecking attacks, ignore the -1 Card token, can trigger Tunnels... Besides the problem with being strictly better than Lab, making it a 6$ has the added advantage that it now is expensive enough for Remodel shenannigans, in that you can avoid trashing a copy of Beachcomb by revealing another.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 22, 2017, 12:06:39 pm
I like all the changes, except that Beachcomb is now strictly better than Lab.

You're right. I only thought about whether or not discarding from the top of your deck is fun but not about its mechanical implications in relation to card cost.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 23, 2017, 10:43:29 am
Prime token cards

Today, I want to re-introduce my Prime token mechanic. Although it hasn't been changed functionally, here are the rules as a reminder:

The Prime token increases the cost of all cards from the pile it's placed on by $1 and annuls all previous, current and future cost reductions of those cards. As soon as the Prime token is removed from that pile, this effect is made void retroactively, meaning that all past and current cost reductions now apply to cards from that pile even if they are result of resolving cards that have been played when the Prime token was still there.
There is only one Prime token, shared by all players. A player can only move it when instructed by a card, event or landmark.

Since the Prime token needs its own paragraph in the "rulebook", anyway, I took away the redundant lines of text explaining its function from the Prime token cards. I.e. they are no longer self-explanatory but have much less text and look better.

(https://i.imgur.com/SpguFPd.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/3KllCMn.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/Zz3vQKz.png)

I also added an Attack card and a Landmark which utilize the Prime token.

(https://i.imgur.com/qKvxN9D.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/qQVSpBQ.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 23, 2017, 11:02:44 am
Salesman should say "token to an".

Riverside should probably say "differently costing Action". Even then, the text is a little ambiguous and should probably be more like Palace.

Royalty seems nuts, but it could work.

Chancellery is too similar to obelisk for me.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 23, 2017, 11:16:16 am
Thanks for the hints. The wording on Riverside has been a pain so far and I'm open to any suggestions (preferably from native speakers) as to how to describe this correctly. Palace's wording can't apply here because Riverside doesn't count individual cards in your deck but rather two copies each with a different cost, similarly to how Fairgrounds only couts cards with different names. So maybe something like "Worth 2 VP for every 2 differently costing Action cards in your deck (rounded down)."

Obelisk is one of my favourite Landmarks, and making a similar Landmark using the Prime token felt natural. Anyway, I expect them to play very differently due to the permanent cost increase (unless there's another card that moves the Prime token).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Fragasnap on October 23, 2017, 06:00:10 pm
You were missed, Co0kieL0rd.

Beachcomb
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Discard the top 2 cards of your deck. Look through your discard pile and put 2 cards from it into your hand.
When one of your cards is trashed, you may reveal this from your hand to discard that card.
Aside from being better than Laboratory (even in its older $6 variety I think it was significantly so), the Reaction is utterly broken in the presence of many trash-for-benefits since you can trash Provinces with impunity. What's more to consider is that since this is a cantrip-Reaction, one can further acquire as many of them as one wishes so as to always be able to trigger its Reaction.
The top half I quite like as a $6 card on its own. The Reaction I think will be much better served on a trash-for-benefit card in and of itself for balance concerns.

Provisioner
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Play up to 2 Treasures from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
When you gain this, you may set aside a Copper you have in play, to play it at the start of your next turn.
"Treasures" is misspelt on the image. Is the on-gain necessary? I don't like it because it seems so clumsy. It is thematic to neither the set of Roots & Renewal nor to its own described role.

Salesman
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $2
Move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Put this on your Tavern mat.
At the start of your turn, you may call this. If you do, all cards cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0.
While I like the Prime token mechanism, this one is strained to use it. I am ultimately not very interested in the card both for being a random Reserve card (you know how I feel about off-theme cards) and because it is different but similar enough to Highway in that it is a cost reduction looking for +Buys.

Revaluate
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.
I played with this one back when it had a different theme I think, but I think it is too strong. If the Prime token and Remodeling were asynchronous or it cost $6 I don't think it would be too much of a problem.
While I appreciate that it can only Prime Action cards, Remodel's abilities to trash Gold to Province and Estate to useful cards are its key features that are not mitigated in anyway by that condition. Being able to Expand $5 Actions into Provinces so freely on a card that is also so versatile otherwise (unlike the otherwise similar Graverobber) puts it over the edge.

Riverside
Types: Victory
Cost: $6
Worth 2VP per 2 differently cost Actions cards you have a copy of (rounded down).
When you gain this, move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile.
This is possibly decent, though the ability to screw a player with the last Riverside remains on my mind. I would watch it for that possibility.

Royalty
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
Move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Each other player with 5 or more cards in hand trashes a card costing $5 from it (or reveals a hand with no such cards). Gain one of the trashed cards.
I recommend using the phrase "costing exactly $5" to avoid misreading. I imagine everyone will hate the card, but I don't dislike it. It may want to trash itself when it hits a Victory card just to avoid that circle.

Chancellery
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 2VP per card you have from the pile with the Prime token.
Setup: Move the Prime token to a random Action non-Victory Supply pile.
I have the same worries about this as Riverside. Otherwise I like it. I agree that it will generally play differently enough compared to Obelisk due to the cost increment.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 23, 2017, 07:51:23 pm
Fragasnap, thank you for transcribing my cards (which I was too lazy to do myself)! Let me comment on your feedback;

Beachcomb: After what you and Asper said I'm not only scratching my head over why exactly I was thinking Beachcomb's changes were reasonable. Actually, the only thing that matters to me is the bottom part. I wanted the top to have something to do with it but the old top seems too similar to Harbinger today. The recent buff makes it too self-synergetic and powerful. So Beachcomb's bottom should get something new and more interesting. Until then, let's consider Beachcomb back in alpha stage of development.

Provisioner: The on-gain effect fits one of Roots and Renewal's themes which is manipulating your opening turns. Maybe it could be slightly altered but I want something of that sort to be there.

Salesman: I know, it's probably the least interesting Prime token card, definitely the weakest and often skippable. I'm just trying out various different ideas for cards that make use of this effect. Also, I don't have a problem with borrowing unique mechanics from other sets (like Reserve cards). If I feel like it fits any of my card as well as my expansion's themes, I'll use it.

Revaluate: It's never been functionally changed, just has less text and a different artwork now. It's certainly strong but I'll want to do some more test games to see for myself if it's too strong. In that case I like your suggestion to let you either move the token or remodel a card when you play it.

Riverside: I am comparing this to Landmarks where you put 6VP per player in the setup (Arena, Basilica, Baths, Battlefield, Colonnade, Labyrinth). You take 2VP from any those under a certain condition which makes it so VP swings between players are larger when one of them takes VP from those Landmarks more often than the others. This was kind of the idea for Riverside, too; but going down from 6VP to 4VP per Riverside just because your opponent gained the last one is probably too harsh. I've had maybe two games with it and that was so long ago... it should problably be worth 1VP per differently costed Action card you have.

Royalty: I also imagine many will hate this but so do people some original Dominion cards. I want to try it and if it's balanced, I'll keep it in the set. Glad you don't hate it, though!

Chancellery: I think this will play very differently from Obelisk as well as Riverside because you can't get screwed over so bad (unless there's another Prime token card in the Kindgom which needs to be analyzed in test games).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 25, 2017, 11:06:45 am
I decided I don't  like Beachcomb's old top part anymore (way too dependent on shuffle luck, either powerful or useless). I also changed the bottom part to returning trashed cards to the Supply (instead of putting them into your discard pile) and want to try it as a reaction for Reconvert. Reconvert offers flexible trash-for-benefit but all of its options are weak and require you to trash expensive cards for only temporary bonuses. This new reaction might mitigate that a little, enables some cute tricks, and it's thematic.

(https://i.imgur.com/GQ3DSYM.png)
Quote
Reconvert, $4, Action/ Reaction
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card; +1 Action; or +$1. You get your choice for each $1 the trashed card costs.
When you trash a card, you may reveal this from your hand, to return that card to the Supply.

So, the old Beachcomb's dead but I like its name so I'm using it for a new card. My set is lacking a Smithy variant - big, terminal, unconditional draw with a bonus. This is what I came up with (the on-gain effect is thematic).

(https://i.imgur.com/mtBkYLx.png)
Quote
Beachcomb, $5, Action
Discard up to 3 cards you have in play. Then draw 3 cards.
When you gain this, you may discard your hand, for +3 Cards.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: navical on October 25, 2017, 11:29:51 am
Beachcomb has the issue of leading to infinite loops, and I think it's pretty common that they're possible.
E.g. Village, Beachcomb, Market in play, empty deck and discard, 2 Actions.
Play Beachcomb, discard Village, Beachcomb, Market. Draw Village, Beachcomb, Market.
Play Village, Market, we're back where we started, but with +1 coin and +1 buy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 25, 2017, 11:58:29 am
Beachcomb has the issue of leading to infinite loops, and I think it's pretty common that they're possible.
E.g. Village, Beachcomb, Market in play, empty deck and discard, 2 Actions.
Play Beachcomb, discard Village, Beachcomb, Market. Draw Village, Beachcomb, Market.
Play Village, Market, we're back where we started, but with +1 coin and +1 buy.
Dang, I forgot it was supposed to not be able to discard Beachcombs from play. But I guess with at least one other Smithy variant and a Village variant in the Kingdom, you can theoretically do infinite turns. I'm afraid there's no way to make this effect work without also enabling infinite turns :(
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: navical on October 25, 2017, 02:21:25 pm
Beachcomb has the issue of leading to infinite loops, and I think it's pretty common that they're possible.
E.g. Village, Beachcomb, Market in play, empty deck and discard, 2 Actions.
Play Beachcomb, discard Village, Beachcomb, Market. Draw Village, Beachcomb, Market.
Play Village, Market, we're back where we started, but with +1 coin and +1 buy.
Dang, I forgot it was supposed to not be able to discard Beachcombs from play. But I guess with at least one other Smithy variant and a Village variant in the Kingdom, you can theoretically do infinite turns. I'm afraid there's no way to make this effect work without also enabling infinite turns :(
If you can't discard Beachcombs from play it's probably OK, since that puts a limit on the number of times you can discard other cards from play. Or at least, it does in the absence of ways to trash cards in play combined with gaining from the trash, but we can already go infinite with that kind of combo so I wouldn't worry too much...
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on October 28, 2017, 11:49:39 am
Villages/ Splitters

I have completely overhauled the villages of my set and... most of them are still kind of awkward. I mean, except for Reeve, they have some caveat in that they can't easily be gained or don't draw a card unconditionally. But maybe that's fine since Dominion has plenty of simple and gentle villages. I'm trying to find a good place in Roots in Renewal for each of these. Feedback is very appreciated here, as some of these cards seem clunky, even to me.

(https://i.imgur.com/9TalTxk.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/VPiAHbJ.png)
Quote
Reeve, $4, Action
+1 Card. +2 Actions. You may gain an Estate to your hand.
Setup: Each player sets aside a Manor and moves their Estate token to it. (Your Estates gain its abilities and types.)
Quote
Manor, $0*, Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or +1 Buy. (This is not in the Supply.)
Reeve existed even before Inheritance was published, although back then it just modified Estates with an "In games using this"-clause. This new wording should avoid any confusion when Estates are also inherited; they simply lose the abilities of Manor.
Reeve is great in some alt-VP strategies, with cards like Crossroads, Shepherd, Silk Road etc. but since the Estate gaining isn't mandatory, you can use it as a regular village in engines as well. Also watch for 3-pile endings with this card!

(https://i.imgur.com/aHgSHR4.png)
Quote
Refugees, $2, Action
Choose two: +1 Card; +1 Action; +$1. (The choices may be the same.)
Setup: Put this onto the Refugees mat. At the start of each playerís turn, if the Refugees pile is empty, put a card from the Refugees mat into the Supply.
Refugees can be a Necropolis, a Moat, a Copper or... a Pawn? No! It doesn't give you buys! See, it's all balanced. What's those other lines of text? There's only one Refugees in the Supply at a time so it always empties out when you buy it? Surely that's never going to matter...

(https://i.imgur.com/mbsV1xG.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/YtOnuV7.png)
Quote
Builder, $4, Action/ Reaction
+4 Cards. Discard 3 cards.
When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this, to gain a Battlement from its pile onto your deck.
Quote
Battlement, $3*, Action
+2 Actions. You may gain an Attack card.
When discard trash this other than during Clean-up, you may trash it. If you do, each other player trashes an Attack card they have in play. (This is not in the Supply.)
Builder has been like this for a while. Only Battlement, the splitter, changes all the time. I know reactions that harm the attacker are considered bad design but I figured it might be okay to trash your opponents' attack cards if you have to trash your Battlement for it. Some of you will say it's not okay, it sucks... but I'll only be convinced after sufficient testing, ideally with different people who tell me afterwards how it felt playing with and against Builder/Battlement. However, I tend to miss problematic interactions between original cards and my own so I'm thankful for any hints about such.

(https://i.imgur.com/T9Pyc6Z.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/3LniZCx.png)
Quote
Bivouac, $3, Action
+2 Actions. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.
[Split pile]
Siege, $6, Action/ Duration/ Attack
Each other player discards a Siege they have in play and gains a Ruins. Now and at the start of each of your turns, until this leaves play: +$1
Bivouac and Siege form a split pile. This hasn't been tested so far and Asper argues that these two would synergize even better with each other if Siege offered some draw. I'm not opposed to it but I also want to capture typical properties of sieges - steady-state and ruination - in Siege's concept. I'd also like to keep its unique mechanic of discarding other Durations from play to stop their effect. Is there still room for draw? Or is Siege too weird or weak? Should Bivouac's effect be on Battlement instead? So many questions. I guess many answers lie in play-testing.
I just noticed Bivouac needs the looter type as well.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on October 28, 2017, 12:01:51 pm
To expand on Siege, my statement was mostly that they would benefit if Siege was a terminal attack that doesn't stay out, as the attack digging of Bivouac will fail as soon as all of your Sieges are in play. It's still a Chancellor-Village, but not getting that draw is pretty bad. Considering that going for Sieges hurts both you and the other SIege players (your Sieges will stay out less and others will deal out more Ruins) I think the best defense against the card is usually to just ignore it. You give me a Ruins once, and now you're stuck with a money-Hireling and a Village that Chancellors instead of drawing. If the card was a non-duration attack like Torturer or Margrave, things would look very different.

Edit: I guess my point is, do Siege, but don't put it under Bivouac. Put a regular terminal attack there so the cards actually have a synergy.
Edit 2: I think we actually played a game with this, and Bivouac was a Chancellor most of the time. Part of that was that I didn't buy any Bivouacs.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Aquila on October 28, 2017, 04:01:21 pm
Quote
Reconvert, $4, Action/ Reaction
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card; +1 Action; or +$1. You get your choice for each $1 the trashed card costs.
When you trash a card, you may reveal this from your hand, to return that card to the Supply.
I've tried returning to the Supply as an alternative to trashing, and I don't feel it works as most of the time it needlessly prolongs the game. Here though you can make a never-ending golden deck that could quite likely be optimal: Dominate, return Provinces to the Supply with e.g. Salvager, repeat.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on November 01, 2017, 05:06:52 pm
You know, I was thinking a bit ago about how the heirloom bar specifically says "Heirloom: X". Since it doesn't say just "X", who's to say it has to be Heirlooms only? I think what was previously Poacher could say "Shelter: X" in a bar at the bottom. Seems legit.

Also, updating the OP would be nice.

And I think the new Beachcomb could work if it just couldn't discard beachcombs.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 01, 2017, 06:44:38 pm
Quote
Reconvert, $4, Action/ Reaction
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card; +1 Action; or +$1. You get your choice for each $1 the trashed card costs.
When you trash a card, you may reveal this from your hand, to return that card to the Supply.
I've tried returning to the Supply as an alternative to trashing, and I don't feel it works as most of the time it needlessly prolongs the game. Here though you can make a never-ending golden deck that could quite likely be optimal: Dominate, return Provinces to the Supply with e.g. Salvager, repeat.

That's a good thing because such a niche reaction struggles to find space for application. It should be pretty difficult to make a golden deck with it but when you do it, it should be pretty awesome. I personally like golden decks.

You know, I was thinking a bit ago about how the heirloom bar specifically says "Heirloom: X". Since it doesn't say just "X", who's to say it has to be Heirlooms only? I think what was previously Poacher could say "Shelter: X" in a bar at the bottom. Seems legit.

Also, updating the OP would be nice.

And I think the new Beachcomb could work if it just couldn't discard beachcombs.
I like your suggestion. Although if it said "Shelter: Forest Hut" at the bottom of Trapper, it might lead to the question whether you should replace the other Estates with regular Shelters, too (which you shouldn't). But that's fine for a fan card, I guess. It's way more elegant anyway.

I'm hesitant to update the OP until I have established most of my card revisions. I'm testing and fixing cards pretty regularly at the moment and don't want to update the OP all the time and simultaneously make new posts. I also gotta make and upload images. It's a good chunk of work that I'm trying to distribute over several days. The OP is last on the schedule. But I won't forget about it!

Beachcomb now says "Discard up to 3 non-Duration cards other than Beachcomb you have in play. Then draw 3 cards." I just didn't upload the new image, yet.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 01, 2017, 07:32:09 pm
Here are a few more ideas I came up with and didn't get to playtest, yet. I tend to miss some important flaws when designing cards so I'll take any feedback into account before mocking these up.

Quote
Building Crane X, $3<2>, Action
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Return this to the Supply. Building Cranes cost $3 less this turn, but not less than $0<2>.
Building Crane costs $5 and when you return it, it costs $2 less. Depending on the +Buy situation in the Kingdom, the power of this effect ranged from non-relevant to absurd. Sometimes you could just drain the BC pile (costing $0) with tons of buys and set up a megaturn. I'm considering giving BC a coin-debt-hybrid cost so that you can still drain the pile with buys but you can never get them for free. You'd always have to pay at least <2> per Crane on your next turn. If that's too cheap I could adjust it to <3>. How do you like it? Can the wording on BCX be better?

Quote
Smeltery, $4, Action
Trash up to 3 cards from your hand. Return up to 3 cards with the same name from the trash to the Supply. +$1 per card you returned.
Games using this canít end on 3 empty piles unless the trash is empty.
I had this idea for a bottom part (which probably countless people had before) and came up with a nifty top to work with it. Either it leads to interesting games, or itís mostly annoying, weíll see. It might also be too strong.

Quote
Gem, $4, Action/ Treasure
If itís your Action phase, +2 Cards. If itís your Buy phase, +$2.
While this is in play, if you played exactly 4 cards, return this to your hand.
Inspired by Asperís Jeweller (which didnít work out) and Road, this card is very weak when played once but if you put some work into it, can boost your turn multiple times. Alternatively, it could go back to your hand on different triggers depending on your current phase (e.g. 2 actions in your Action phase and 3 Coppers in your Buy phase).

Quote
Recruiter, $4, Action/ Looter/ Gathering
+2 Actions. You may gain a card costing up to 5. If you do, return this to the Supply and add 1 VP to the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile.
When you buy this, if there are any VP on the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile, take them, instead of gaining this.
Split pile
Crusade, $5, Action/ Attack/ Looter/ Gathering
+2 Cards. Each other player gains a Ruins. Add 2 VP to the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile.
I wanted another Gathering pile like Temple from which you take the VP on-gain but of course different from Temple in all other ways. Itís got the following premises (i.e. things I want in its concept):
ē   Itís a Gathering split pile
ē   The top card returns to the Supply to block the bottom card
ē   The bottom card adds more VP to the pile than the top card
ē   One of the two cards can gain cards to circumvent the VP-taking (in case youíd rather have the card)
So far, Iím not very pleased with the whole thing. It seems clunky but perhaps you can see what Iím going for. Iíll keep thinking about it.

Quote
Bootlegger 2, $3, Action
+2 Cards. +1 Buy.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing up to $2 to the Supply. When you gain a 2nd card in one of your turns, also gain a card from that pile. When you trash a card from that pile, return it to the Supply.
Just another Supply-related thing I want to try out. It floods your deck with a cheap card you may or may not want. Big Money resists it. I have no idea if thatís actually an intriguing concept.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on November 01, 2017, 08:26:48 pm
Building Crane is the perfect fit for a Heirloom that gives +1 Buy. Maybe Nocturne already has one of those? In that case, you could just let Building Crane use that official Heirloom.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 01, 2017, 08:55:39 pm
Building Crane is the perfect fit for a Heirloom that gives +1 Buy. Maybe Nocturne already has one of those? In that case, you could just let Building Crane use that official Heirloom.

I really need to hug you some time.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: navical on November 02, 2017, 04:19:14 am

Quote
Gem, $4, Action/ Treasure
If itís your Action phase, +2 Cards. If itís your Buy phase, +$2.
While this is in play, if you played exactly 4 cards, return this to your hand.
Inspired by Asperís Jeweller (which didnít work out) and Road, this card is very weak when played once but if you put some work into it, can boost your turn multiple times. Alternatively, it could go back to your hand on different triggers depending on your current phase (e.g. 2 actions in your Action phase and 3 Coppers in your Buy phase).

Just to check how Gem is meant to work. Suppose:

I play Village
I play Gem
I play Village
I play Gem
-> at this point, do both Gems go back into my hand?
Now I play Gem again. This is the 5th card I've played this turn, so it - and any future Gems I play - won't return to my hand again. Correct?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: josh56 on November 02, 2017, 10:13:04 am
Quote
Gem, $4, Action/ Treasure
If itís your Action phase, +2 Cards. If itís your Buy phase, +$2.
While this is in play, if you played exactly 4 cards, return this to your hand.
Inspired by Asperís Jeweller (which didnít work out) and Road, this card is very weak when played once but if you put some work into it, can boost your turn multiple times. Alternatively, it could go back to your hand on different triggers depending on your current phase (e.g. 2 actions in your Action phase and 3 Coppers in your Buy phase).
You are right that Gem is a weak Action card which only works well if you have a decent village density. But if you view it as Silver+ for $4 it seems pretty good.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 02, 2017, 04:04:27 pm
Just to check how Gem is meant to work. Suppose:

I play Village
I play Gem
I play Village
I play Gem
-> at this point, do both Gems go back into my hand?
Now I play Gem again. This is the 5th card I've played this turn, so it - and any future Gems I play - won't return to my hand again. Correct?
No, it's different. Gem doesn't count cards in play but cards you played, while it's in play. Let me supplement your example:

I play, in this order: Village A, Gem A, Village B, Gem B.
At this point, no Gem returns to my hand because I only played 3 cards while Gem A was in play and 0 cards while Gem B was in play.

After the original 4 cards, I continue to play: Village C, Gem A, Smithy, ending my Action phase. Then, in my Buy phase, Copper, Gem B, Copper, Gem A, Copper.
Gem A returns the first time after Village C, since at this point I played exactly 4 cards while Gem A was in play. I then play Gem A again, Smithy and Copper, causing Gem B to return. I play Gem B again (this time as a Silver) and Copper, which makes Gem A return yet again so I can play it a third time (as a Silver).

You are right that Gem is a weak Action card which only works well if you have a decent village density. But if you view it as Silver+ for $4 it seems pretty good.
Now that I think about it again, in the above example it doesn't seem hard at all to return Gem to your hand at least once per turn. And it compares very favourably to Royal Seal. Royal Seal sucks but anyway Gem should probably cost $5.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on November 02, 2017, 05:42:54 pm
Just to check how Gem is meant to work. Suppose:

I play Village
I play Gem
I play Village
I play Gem
-> at this point, do both Gems go back into my hand?
Now I play Gem again. This is the 5th card I've played this turn, so it - and any future Gems I play - won't return to my hand again. Correct?
No, it's different. Gem doesn't count cards in play but cards you played, while it's in play. Let me supplement your example:

I play, in this order: Village A, Gem A, Village B, Gem B.
At this point, no Gem returns to my hand because I only played 3 cards while Gem A was in play and 0 cards while Gem B was in play.

After the original 4 cards, I continue to play: Village C, Gem A, Smithy, ending my Action phase. Then, in my Buy phase, Copper, Gem B, Copper, Gem A, Copper.
Gem A returns the first time after Village C, since at this point I played exactly 4 cards while Gem A was in play. I then play Gem A again, Smithy and Copper, causing Gem B to return. I play Gem B again (this time as a Silver) and Copper, which makes Gem A return yet again so I can play it a third time (as a Silver).

You are right that Gem is a weak Action card which only works well if you have a decent village density. But if you view it as Silver+ for $4 it seems pretty good.
Now that I think about it again, in the above example it doesn't seem hard at all to return Gem to your hand at least once per turn. And it compares very favourably to Royal Seal. Royal Seal sucks but anyway Gem should probably cost $5.

If this is how you want it to work I think you need to say something like "While this is in play, if you have played 4 more cards return it to your hand." Otherwise the way you worded it works like how navical interpreted it, because it can remember cards played before it.
Aside from that, doesn't this give you infinite money with 5 Gems? It doesn't seem too difficult to set that up in a 2 player game at least.

Actually I might as well comment on some other cards while I'm here!

Quote
Building Crane X, $3<2>, Action
+3 Cards. +1 Action. Return this to the Supply. Building Cranes cost $3 less this turn, but not less than $0<2>.

I guess the most similar card to this is Encampment? +3 cards +1 action is better than +2 cards +2 actions but there's no way to keep these and the first one is expensive so it might be balanced? Maybe having access to 10 of these makes it too easy to megaturn? Hard to say without playing with it myself. Actually that gives me the idea of a split pile where the top card makes the bottom one cheaper, that could be cool. 

Quote
Smeltery, $4, Action
Trash up to 3 cards from your hand. Return up to 3 cards with the same name from the trash to the Supply. +$1 per card you returned.
Games using this canít end on 3 empty piles unless the trash is empty.

I like the below the line effect quite a lot but the top part seems way too good for $4. Such a fast and flexible trasher shouldn't give so much economy and cost less than $5, but it could be good at 5.

Quote
Recruiter, $4, Action/ Looter/ Gathering
+2 Actions. You may gain a card costing up to 5. If you do, return this to the Supply and add 1 VP to the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile.
When you buy this, if there are any VP on the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile, take them, instead of gaining this.
Split pile
Crusade, $5, Action/ Attack/ Looter/ Gathering
+2 Cards. Each other player gains a Ruins. Add 2 VP to the Recruiter/Crusade Supply pile.

So it's a one shot better than University/ Necropolis-Feast on top and a bad Cultist on bottom, with all this gathering business going on too. Actually I think with +1 card token you can generate infinite vp with recruiter. Draw the deck and have 2 of these and then you can draw the one you gain and keep adding vp to the pile. Well a no recruiter clause can prevent that, but then it seems almost impossible to get to the Crusades. Maybe only crusade should add vp to the pile then?   

Quote
Bootlegger 2, $3, Action
+2 Cards. +1 Buy.
Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing up to $2 to the Supply. When you gain a 2nd card in one of your turns, also gain a card from that pile. When you trash a card from that pile, return it to the Supply.

The below the line is cool but I think you want the top part to interact with it in some way, obviously you want the +buy or gaining but maybe something that cares about $2 costs or that specific pile. Some kind of Will-O'-Wisp Chariot Race mashup perhaps? Otherwise the below the line feels a bit tacked on to me.

Well I think you have a lot of great card ideas here! I enjoyed looking through these and I'll have to comment on your other cards at some point too!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Aquila on November 02, 2017, 07:05:34 pm
Quote
Reconvert, $4, Action/ Reaction
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: +1 Card; +1 Action; or +$1. You get your choice for each $1 the trashed card costs.
When you trash a card, you may reveal this from your hand, to return that card to the Supply.
I've tried returning to the Supply as an alternative to trashing, and I don't feel it works as most of the time it needlessly prolongs the game. Here though you can make a never-ending golden deck that could quite likely be optimal: Dominate, return Provinces to the Supply with e.g. Salvager, repeat.

That's a good thing because such a niche reaction struggles to find space for application. It should be pretty difficult to make a golden deck with it but when you do it, it should be pretty awesome. I personally like golden decks.
And I agree golden decks are good. I admit I wasn't very clear, but the main thing I'd like to mention is how most cards that return other cards to the supply open up the problem of endless VP situations. The scenario I give with Reconvert never brings the game towards its end, and because it generates 9VP per turn it's likely that both players would go for doing it.
Smeltery can make all the on-gain VP methods endless; Emporium, Temple, Goons, Farmers Market, Wild Hunt etc. if you return and re-buy them each turn (or what you bought for Goons, Wild Hunt Estates).
Bootlegger 2 can do the same with your own Sojourner in Seasons, I believe.

Cards that return themselves to the supply can avoid this problem, and Building Crane X I like. Unless it proves too automatic with all sources of +buy.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 02, 2017, 08:20:31 pm
Thanks for your feedback and suggestions! Aquila and Gazbag, you are making good points. Of course I want to avoid loopholes and methods to gain infinite VP but I tend to overlook such possibilities so I appreciate other people pointing me to it.

Gazbag gave me this idea for a Split pile to make Building Crane easier to access but megaturns harder to pull off (although small quatities of these cards boost you by a lot):
Quote
Draft Horses, $3, Action
+2 Cards. +1 Action. +1 Buy. +$1. Return this to the Supply.
Split pile
Building Crane, $5, Action
You may reveal an Action card costing $2 or $3 from your hand. Play it three times. If this is the first time you played a Building Crane this turn, all copies of the revealed card cost $0 this turn.

You were both right in that Smeltery would be too powerful and too easily enable infinite VP generation. Here's a massive nerf that still conveys the central concept of emptying the trash to prevent a 3-pile ending but makes VP loops considerably more difficult:
Quote
Smeltery 2, $3, Action
+$1. Choose one: Trash up to 2 cards from your hand; or trash this and return up to 5 cards from the trash to the Supply.
Games using this canít end on 3 empty piles unless the trash is empty.

And finally, following Gazbags suggestion, Gem might be fine like this:
Quote
Gem, $5, Action/ Treasure
If itís your Action phase, +2 Cards. If itís your Buy phase, +$2.
While this is in play, if you played exactly 3 more cards other than Gem, return this to your hand.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on November 02, 2017, 08:24:39 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on November 03, 2017, 01:10:33 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.

I agree, maybe the top card could be the crane and the bottom whatever the crane is building?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 03, 2017, 01:20:18 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.

I agree, maybe the top card could be the crane and the bottom whatever the crane is building?

Are you just talking about the names of the two cards and not about mechanical synergy, because I think they got the latter?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on November 03, 2017, 01:50:43 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.
I agree, maybe the top card could be the crane and the bottom whatever the crane is building?
Are you just talking about the names of the two cards and not about mechanical synergy, because I think they got the latter?

Yeah, the names. There is some thematic tie-in if the art is like Draft Horses hauling stones that the cranes use, but you'd need good art.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on November 03, 2017, 01:55:29 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.

I agree, maybe the top card could be the crane and the bottom whatever the crane is building?

Are you just talking about the names of the two cards and not about mechanical synergy, because I think they got the latter?

I was just talking about the names yeah, the mechanical synergy is there for me. Maybe even too much synergy, I wouldn't be surprised if Craning Draft Horses is too strong.  Can't say for sure without testing it though, it could be good!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 06, 2017, 05:20:43 pm
I feel like Draft Horses/Building Crane needs more thematic tie-in for a split pile.

I agree, maybe the top card could be the crane and the bottom whatever the crane is building?

Are you just talking about the names of the two cards and not about mechanical synergy, because I think they got the latter?

I was just talking about the names yeah, the mechanical synergy is there for me. Maybe even too much synergy, I wouldn't be surprised if Craning Draft Horses is too strong.  Can't say for sure without testing it though, it could be good!
You may be right and I'll probably reword those two cards yet again because I'm not quite pleased with the idea.
Actually, I'm planning to revise my set even harder, and get rid of all cards that feel redundant now so many new cards released in the last 2 years (including the 2nd edition cards).

There are two cards in R&R that I will tackle today that are very likely to be cut from the set indefinitely, and I'll quickly explain why:

(https://i.imgur.com/sdFUclL.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/gu79fIU.png)

Back when Black Market was the only card that allowed to play treasures during your action phase, Provisioner seemed cute because it combined it with draw-to-X which is really effective. Such a strong card doesn't warrant the on-gain Copper-Save mechanic but I didn't know where else to put it. Now I know, but let's talk about Bastion first.
Bastion feels very similar to Poacher, even though the former quite stronger. It's also pretty boring which is okay for a $4-card but not a $6-card, at least that's how I feel.
Today I had this idea; why not combine discard-per-empty-supply-pile with draw-to-X? It's a natural fit and there's no other card that does it. I made X really low and gave it +1 Action because my set needed $3-cards (which I struggle to come up with good concepts for) and it needed cantrips. The new Provisioner fulfils both requirements. I made it pruposefully weak so the on-gain Copper-Save from the old Provisioner is warranted and because I think situational cards are more fun when you find a board where they shine.

(https://i.imgur.com/zDT5bUs.png)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on November 07, 2017, 12:31:25 am
The good thing about the old provisioner is that the wording and mechanics are a lot clearer than Storyteller. Every time I introduce Storyteller to a new player IRL (and often the 2nd and 3rd times they play with it), they read the card and then have to ask for an explanation of what it does.

I mostly like the new provisioner except I don't like how the bottom is an antisynergy to the top. You could say "When you gain this, you may set aside a copper you have in play, and play it in your next buy phase." That would make it stronger, but I think that's okay. I guess some people wouldn't like the weirdness of an on-gain duration effect though.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 07, 2017, 09:13:12 am
The good thing about the old provisioner is that the wording and mechanics are a lot clearer than Storyteller. Every time I introduce Storyteller to a new player IRL (and often the 2nd and 3rd times they play with it), they read the card and then have to ask for an explanation of what it does.

I mostly like the new provisioner except I don't like how the bottom is an antisynergy to the top. You could say "When you gain this, you may set aside a copper you have in play, and play it in your next buy phase." That would make it stronger, but I think that's okay. I guess some people wouldn't like the weirdness of an on-gain duration effect though.

I did this on purpose for two reasons: I actually think that the on-gain effect is so powerful in the early, while being so cheap, that is has to come with an on-play ability that is weak at first, as well as anti-synergistic later. The latter is to counteract the fact that in some decks, new Provisioner can be a super-lab but you really gotta thin those Coppers aggressively. This way, it's supposed to be strong but balanced in early-game and mid-game.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 10, 2017, 04:08:54 am
The Travellers

I made minor tweaks to my travellers:

(https://i.imgur.com/QMdkhSl.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/9Yy81H3.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/Ebj8HJE.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/jH1QTmD.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/IeKmXbw.png)

Quote
Petty Lord, $2, Action/ Looter/ Traveller
+1 Action. +$1. You may return a non-Victory card from the trash to the Supply.
At the start of Clean-up this turn, you may choose one: if there is at least 1 Victory card per player in the trash, exchange this for a Protector; or, if you have at least 2 cards in hand, exchange this for a Robber Knight.

Quote
Robber Knight, $5*, Action/ Attack/ Looter/ Traveller
Trash up to 2 cards from your hand. Gain a Silver. Each other player gains a Ruins.
When you discard this from play, if there are one or more empty Supply piles, you may exchange this for a Warlord. (This is not in the Supply.)

Quote
Protector, $5*, Action/ Traveller
Reveal your hand. +$1 per differently cost card revealed.
When you discard this from play, if there are at least 2 Ruins per player in the trash, you may exchange it for a Savior. (This is not in the Supply.)

Quote
Warlord, $7*, Action/ Attack
+4 Cards. Move the Prime token to an Action Supply pile. Each other player with 5 or more cards in their hand discards a card from that pile (or reveals a hand no such cards). (This is not in the Supply.)

Quote
Savior, $7*, Action
+1 Action. Do this twice: Name a card and reveal cards from your deck until you reveal the named card, then put it into your hand and discard the rest. (This is not in the Supply.)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on November 10, 2017, 07:35:46 am
If you're changing the travellers can you change them to the right template? I hate the current arrow.

Also Warlord can just say (or reveals they can't). That should save you a line.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on November 10, 2017, 04:23:32 pm
Also Warlord can just say (or reveals they can't). That should save you a line.

Thanks for the hint. I missed that in the 2nd edition rephrasings.

If you're changing the travellers can you change them to the right template? I hate the current arrow.

I'm sorry if I have offended your aesthetic sensation. If you could kindly pass me the right template, I'll gladly change it for you.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LastFootnote on November 10, 2017, 04:52:17 pm
If you're changing the travellers can you change them to the right template? I hate the current arrow.

Hey man, that was what it looked like in development. I think it's less jarring than the actual printed arrow, but of course I'm biased. And jarring is probably good, since it's meant to be a reminder.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 15, 2017, 09:25:13 am
Here's my take on a card that (b)locks Supply piles but tries not to be too obnoxious about it. Lock's the top of a split pile, Caretaker the bottom.

You got your Key right from the start so it's just a matter of time until all Locks are trashed. But Caretaker can retrieve them from the trash and do some cute tricks with Treasures.

Since Locks can't be gained from the Supply and only one can be removed per shuffle per player if they so desire, it's going to take a while until piles are starting to get 'Locked'. Lost your Key meanwhile? Let's hope your opponent's Caretaker doesn't find it in the trash. They probably won't give it back!

(https://i.imgur.com/oHdaCAd.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/KF7HXZP.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/VUnnchO.png)

Quote
Lock, $4, Treasure: $2. When you play this, set it aside. At the start of Clean-up, put it onto a Kingdom card pile.
While this is in the Supply, you canít gain it. Heirloom: Key
Split pile
Quote
Caretaker, $5, Action: Choose one: Gain a Treasure from the trash to your hand; or you may trash a Treasure from your hand and gain 2 cards costing less than it onto your deck.

Quote
Key, $4, Treasure: $1. When you play this, you may trash a Lock from the Supply.

These cards ware made using Violet CLM's Dominion card image creator (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16622.0). It's really easy to use and the results are premium. Check it out if you haven't already!
I just wish I had found better images for Lock and Caretaker. They look awful and not how I imagined them at all but I'm super bad at finding good images on the internet :(
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on December 15, 2017, 10:10:50 am
Maybe make Key cost 2$ so there are less trashing attacks that can hit it? I'm not sure, but I feel losing your key might be incredibly painful.

How about you just give it a "when you trash this, put it in your discard pile" instead? That would still combo with Caretaker, though not in a way where you sometimes can't win if you lose your key (opponent swindles your key and has the first and only caretaker, uses Lock to cover up the caretaker pile. Now you'll never get back your key and they can lock Province).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 15, 2017, 10:36:13 am
Maybe make Key cost 2$ so there are less trashing attacks that can hit it? I'm not sure, but I feel losing your key might be incredibly painful.

How about you just give it a "when you trash this, put it in your discard pile" instead? That would still combo with Caretaker, though not in a way where you sometimes can't win if you lose your key (opponent swindles your key and has the first and only caretaker, uses Lock to cover up the caretaker pile. Now you'll never get back your key and they can lock Province).

I've thought about trashing attacks but I didn't come up with reducing Key's cost to make it avoid some of them. Good idea. Swindler can't be avoided though and I don't feel like making Key more complex than necessary for this one card alone. Anyway, your opponent can't lock Province. Lock can only be put onto a Kingdom card pile.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Aquila on December 15, 2017, 10:49:38 am
Feels fine power wise, maybe Caretaker is a bit weak.
I didn't raise this before, but there is the issue of errata, and what exactly the Lock on another pile means. Does it count the pile as a Lock Supply pile, or does it maintain its name, types and costs but you can't gain anything under the Lock? In either case, what happens with the exchanging cards? They assume the card they're swapping with is available, and if it isn't it's debatable if the exchange happens at all. Bat into Vampire is the most obvious puzzler.
Ambassador is another one, especially 3+ players where you need to remove a card under the Lock.
Hopefully you get the idea.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on December 15, 2017, 11:02:25 am
Maybe make Key cost 2$ so there are less trashing attacks that can hit it? I'm not sure, but I feel losing your key might be incredibly painful.

How about you just give it a "when you trash this, put it in your discard pile" instead? That would still combo with Caretaker, though not in a way where you sometimes can't win if you lose your key (opponent swindles your key and has the first and only caretaker, uses Lock to cover up the caretaker pile. Now you'll never get back your key and they can lock Province).

I've thought about trashing attacks but I didn't come up with reducing Key's cost to make it avoid some of them. Good idea. Swindler can't be avoided though and I don't feel like making Key more complex than necessary for this one card alone. Anyway, your opponent can't lock Province. Lock can only be put onto a Kingdom card pile.

Oops. Okay, then ignore my comment. If the worst that can happen to you (and only in a Swindler or Hex game) is that you'll have to play Big Money, I think that's fine.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 15, 2017, 11:04:50 am
Feels fine power wise, maybe Caretaker is a bit weak.
I didn't raise this before, but there is the issue of errata, and what exactly the Lock on another pile means. Does it count the pile as a Lock Supply pile, or does it maintain its name, types and costs but you can't gain anything under the Lock? In either case, what happens with the exchanging cards? They assume the card they're swapping with is available, and if it isn't it's debatable if the exchange happens at all. Bat into Vampire is the most obvious puzzler.
Ambassador is another one, especially 3+ players where you need to remove a card under the Lock.
Hopefully you get the idea.

You raise a good point. I'd say (and think accoring to the rules) any card that's not visible in the Supply, can't be gained or exchanged for. But Lock still needs errata that make clear Lock can't ever be gained from the Supply, no matter what other cards say. Maybe that's very inelegant but I'm afraid if it just says it can't be bought it would be too easy to gain Locks with gainers.
Is the Encampment pile with a Lock on it still the Encampment pile? Good question. My errata says it is, and you return your Encampments on top of the Lock. But that's again not very intuitive.
Maybe Lock doesn't even need the part below the line. I should definitely test it without it. That would give me more space to make an additional clause saying something like "that pile keeps its name."
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 15, 2017, 11:05:44 am
Oops. Okay, then ignore my comment. If the worst that can happen to you (and only in a Swindler or Hex game) is that you'll have to play Big Money, I think that's fine.

That's my man as I know him!  8)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 15, 2017, 01:45:22 pm
The treasure trashing option on Caretaker is very weak - it's a limited Stonemason, it only really seems good when used on Gold. I suppose you get Caretaker to gain locks from the trash and that's just a situational extra though, so it's probably not too bad.
Having unlocking Locks tied to an Heirloom means things will get unlocked faster with more players, which may or may not be bad, just different.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 15, 2017, 02:05:42 pm
The treasure trashing option on Caretaker is very weak - it's a limited Stonemason, it only really seems good when used on Gold. I suppose you get Caretaker to gain locks from the trash and that's just a situational extra though, so it's probably not too bad.
Having unlocking Locks tied to an Heirloom means things will get unlocked faster with more players, which may or may not be bad, just different.

Everything you mentioned is the result of deliberate decisions and careful consideration when designing these cards. Caretaker isn't meant to be strong, just unique in its function, and to synergize with Lock, of course.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 15, 2017, 02:15:00 pm
The treasure trashing option on Caretaker is very weak - it's a limited Stonemason, it only really seems good when used on Gold. I suppose you get Caretaker to gain locks from the trash and that's just a situational extra though, so it's probably not too bad.
Having unlocking Locks tied to an Heirloom means things will get unlocked faster with more players, which may or may not be bad, just different.

Everything you mentioned is the result of deliberate decisions and careful consideration when designing these cards. Caretaker isn't meant to be strong, just unique in its function, and to synergize with Lock, of course.

I don't see the point in adding a very weak situational ability onto an already complicated card.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on December 15, 2017, 02:46:44 pm
Oops. Okay, then ignore my comment. If the worst that can happen to you (and only in a Swindler or Hex game) is that you'll have to play Big Money, I think that's fine.

That's my man as I know him!  8)

I should probably change my profile picture to Silver. It'll even keep that shade of blue.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on December 16, 2017, 12:19:11 am
As it's worded, you can never play Locks because you can never gain them. It should say "When this is on a supply pile other than the Lock pile, you can't gain it." (How has no one else noticed that yet?)

EDIT: Nevermind, I get it now. They all get trashed before they can be gained. :P This is convoluted.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Thanar on December 16, 2017, 06:46:48 pm
Here are some alternative lock images for your consideration:
https://amyelnash.deviantart.com/art/lock-and-chain-75399157
https://wtek79.deviantart.com/art/I-Lost-The-Key-485587062
https://dwor-kin.deviantart.com/art/Forever-locked-63173871
(https://img00.deviantart.net/63cd/i/2008/023/d/0/lock_and_chain_by_amyelnash.jpg)  (https://pre00.deviantart.net/2666/th/pre/i/2015/298/c/0/i_lost_the_key_by_wtek79-d813tdi.jpg)  (https://orig00.deviantart.net/c9c0/f/2007/236/3/2/forever_locked_by_dwor_kin.jpg)

I stretched the last one to correct for perspective distortion, Van Gogh filtered it, cropped it and cloned more border to make this image: https://imgur.com/a/e608L The first two could also be Van Gogh filtered to make them look more like illustrations than photos, and second one could certainly be cropped better, but hereís an idea of what they look like mocked up 1 (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Lock&description=%242%0AWhen%20you%20play%20this%20set%20it%20aside.%20At%20the%20start%20of%20Clean-up%20put%20it%20onto%20a%20Kingdom%20card%20pile%0A-%0AWhen%20this%20is%20in%20the%20Supply%2C%20you%20can%27t%20gain%20it.&type=Treasure&credit=Photo%3A%20Dwor-kin&price=%244&preview=%242&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FQh7xFWL.png&color0=1&color1=0&size=0) 2 (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Lock&description=%242%0AWhen%20you%20play%20this%20set%20it%20aside.%20At%20the%20start%20of%20Clean-up%20put%20it%20onto%20a%20Kingdom%20card%20pile%0A-%0AWhen%20this%20is%20in%20the%20Supply%2C%20you%20can%27t%20gain%20it.&type=Treasure&credit=Photo%3A%20amyelnash&price=%244&preview=%242&type2=Heirloom%3A%20Key&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimg00.deviantart.net%2F63cd%2Fi%2F2008%2F023%2Fd%2F0%2Flock_and_chain_by_amyelnash.jpg&color0=1&color1=0&size=0) 3 (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Lock&description=%242%0AWhen%20you%20play%20this%20set%20it%20aside.%20At%20the%20start%20of%20Clean-up%20put%20it%20onto%20a%20Kingdom%20card%20pile%0A-%0AWhen%20this%20is%20in%20the%20Supply%2C%20you%20can%27t%20gain%20it.&type=Treasure&credit=Photo%3A%20wtek79&price=%244&preview=%242&type2=Heirloom%3A%20Key&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fpre00.deviantart.net%2F2666%2Fth%2Fpre%2Fi%2F2015%2F298%2Fc%2F0%2Fi_lost_the_key_by_wtek79-d813tdi.jpg&color0=1&color1=0&size=0) in the Dominion Card Image Generator:
(https://i.imgur.com/Uvcztuz.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/DAf9mrH.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/7Objr26.jpg)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 16, 2017, 09:53:53 pm
The treasure trashing option on Caretaker is very weak - it's a limited Stonemason, it only really seems good when used on Gold. I suppose you get Caretaker to gain locks from the trash and that's just a situational extra though, so it's probably not too bad.
Having unlocking Locks tied to an Heirloom means things will get unlocked faster with more players, which may or may not be bad, just different.

Everything you mentioned is the result of deliberate decisions and careful consideration when designing these cards. Caretaker isn't meant to be strong, just unique in its function, and to synergize with Lock, of course.

I don't see the point in adding a very weak situational ability onto an already complicated card.

I don't think it's a complicated card. The Lock/Caretaker combination certainly benefits from both of Caretaker's effects. Also the Treasure trashing option is very versatile as you can gain two Duchies (6VP) by trashing a Gold, for example. Or any other $5-cost cards.

Here are some alternative lock images for your consideration:

Thank you for the help, although these lock images fall into the same category as most I found - too realistic. Even with the Van Gogh filter they just don't fit the Dominion look at all, sadly :(
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 17, 2017, 05:03:13 pm
The treasure trashing option on Caretaker is very weak - it's a limited Stonemason, it only really seems good when used on Gold. I suppose you get Caretaker to gain locks from the trash and that's just a situational extra though, so it's probably not too bad.
Having unlocking Locks tied to an Heirloom means things will get unlocked faster with more players, which may or may not be bad, just different.

Everything you mentioned is the result of deliberate decisions and careful consideration when designing these cards. Caretaker isn't meant to be strong, just unique in its function, and to synergize with Lock, of course.

I don't see the point in adding a very weak situational ability onto an already complicated card.

I don't think it's a complicated card. The Lock/Caretaker combination certainly benefits from both of Caretaker's effects. Also the Treasure trashing option is very versatile as you can gain two Duchies (6VP) by trashing a Gold, for example. Or any other $5-cost cards.

Sorry I was a bit rushed when I posted that, I should have waited till I had time to write something more constructive.
First of all I should have said that I think the idea of a card that "Locks" supply piles is quite interesting and having an Heirloom tied to the unlocking is very clever.

The point I was trying to make is that if you don't care particularly about Caretaker being strong then the second ability really isn't pulling it's weight to be worth the extra words on the card. I already made the comparison to Stonemason - a card that is so weak that gaining it is basically a downside to balance it's crazy overpay ability. I wouldn't describe it as versatile, quite the opposite really. So if you do care about the power of Caretaker then it probably wants something more than that, I'd suggest just giving it +$1 to keep it simple. I think we might just have different design philosophies on this kind of thing though, I'm a big fan of keeping things as simple as possible.

I'm just going to have to flat out disagree with you on the complexity of this though. It's a split pile, which already means you have to learn twice as many cards as the average card. It then also has an Heirloom, so now in order to know what this is doing you have to learn 3 cards and then on top of that there are weird pile-blocking things going on and gaining from the trash. I can't really think of a way to make a more complicated supply pile - apart from travellers I suppose, maybe Fool and Vamp too. I'm going to use LilbraryAdventurer's initial misunderstanding as evidence for this point  :P
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 17, 2017, 05:55:12 pm
Sorry I was a bit rushed when I posted that, I should have waited till I had time to write something more constructive.
First of all I should have said that I think the idea of a card that "Locks" supply piles is quite interesting and having an Heirloom tied to the unlocking is very clever.

The point I was trying to make is that if you don't care particularly about Caretaker being strong then the second ability really isn't pulling it's weight to be worth the extra words on the card. I already made the comparison to Stonemason - a card that is so weak that gaining it is basically a downside to balance it's crazy overpay ability. I wouldn't describe it as versatile, quite the opposite really. So if you do care about the power of Caretaker then it probably wants something more than that, I'd suggest just giving it +$1 to keep it simple. I think we might just have different design philosophies on this kind of thing though, I'm a big fan of keeping things as simple as possible.

I'm just going to have to flat out disagree with you on the complexity of this though. It's a split pile, which already means you have to learn twice as many cards as the average card. It then also has an Heirloom, so now in order to know what this is doing you have to learn 3 cards and then on top of that there are weird pile-blocking things going on and gaining from the trash. I can't really think of a way to make a more complicated supply pile - apart from travellers I suppose, maybe Fool and Vamp too. I'm going to use LilbraryAdventurer's initial misunderstanding as evidence for this point  :P

Yeah, I guess you're right, the whole spilt pile with Heirloom is pretty complicated. I thought you were only talking about Caretaker when saying that.

Our design philosophies differ some but not a lot. I can get behind simplicity and perceive many other fan cards as too complex. Not my Caretaker on its own though, as both his abilities are unique and they wouldn't really make sense on two separate cards.

Anyway, I also came up with alternative effects for Caretaker which still stick to the basic concept. They should give you an idea of what I want him to be like:

Quote
Caretaker A, $5, Action
+$2. You may gain a Treasure from the trash onto your deck. You may trash a Treasure from your hand, to gain 2 cards each costing less than it.

Quote
Caretaker B, $5, Action/Attack
+$2. You may gain a Treasure from the trash onto your deck. You may trash a Treasure from your hand. If you do, choose a Kingdom card costing less than it. Each other player gains a copy of it.

The wording of Caretaker B isn't the greatest but makes sure the card you choose is the same for each other player. Both alternatives are probably stronger than the current version but neither is simpler. So they're probably not for you either.

Thanks for the constructive criticism anyway. When are you going to check out my other cards? :)
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 17, 2017, 08:25:03 pm
Sorry I was a bit rushed when I posted that, I should have waited till I had time to write something more constructive.
First of all I should have said that I think the idea of a card that "Locks" supply piles is quite interesting and having an Heirloom tied to the unlocking is very clever.

The point I was trying to make is that if you don't care particularly about Caretaker being strong then the second ability really isn't pulling it's weight to be worth the extra words on the card. I already made the comparison to Stonemason - a card that is so weak that gaining it is basically a downside to balance it's crazy overpay ability. I wouldn't describe it as versatile, quite the opposite really. So if you do care about the power of Caretaker then it probably wants something more than that, I'd suggest just giving it +$1 to keep it simple. I think we might just have different design philosophies on this kind of thing though, I'm a big fan of keeping things as simple as possible.

I'm just going to have to flat out disagree with you on the complexity of this though. It's a split pile, which already means you have to learn twice as many cards as the average card. It then also has an Heirloom, so now in order to know what this is doing you have to learn 3 cards and then on top of that there are weird pile-blocking things going on and gaining from the trash. I can't really think of a way to make a more complicated supply pile - apart from travellers I suppose, maybe Fool and Vamp too. I'm going to use LilbraryAdventurer's initial misunderstanding as evidence for this point  :P

Yeah, I guess you're right, the whole spilt pile with Heirloom is pretty complicated. I thought you were only talking about Caretaker when saying that.

Our design philosophies differ some but not a lot. I can get behind simplicity and perceive many other fan cards as too complex. Not my Caretaker on its own though, as both his abilities are unique and they wouldn't really make sense on two separate cards.

Ah yes that makes sense, I wasn't very clear at all was I? Sorry about that!

I might be underrating trashing Gold with Caretaker and then gaining it back actually. You don't get Provinces like with Graverobbering $5's but you can gain more Caretakers so it should be easier to pull off and I guess 2 Duchies is the same VP as a Province too. I didn't really think about that before, there is synergy between the abilities, I was being a bit of a doofus.

Anyway, I also came up with alternative effects for Caretaker which still stick to the basic concept. They should give you an idea of what I want him to be like:

Quote
Caretaker A, $5, Action
+$2. You may gain a Treasure from the trash onto your deck. You may trash a Treasure from your hand, to gain 2 cards each costing less than it.

Quote
Caretaker B, $5, Action/Attack
+$2. You may gain a Treasure from the trash onto your deck. You may trash a Treasure from your hand. If you do, choose a Kingdom card costing less than it. Each other player gains a copy of it.

The wording of Caretaker B isn't the greatest but makes sure the card you choose is the same for each other player. Both alternatives are probably stronger than the current version but neither is simpler. So they're probably not for you either.

Thanks for the constructive criticism anyway. When are you going to check out my other cards? :)

I guess the idea behind the topdecking is to make locking slightly harder to do, which could be a good idea if it's a bit much at the moment and it also means if you draw the treasure then you get an extra +$2 so I guess it's a buff. I think I prefer A to B, B is a little strange to me because it doesn't really reward you for trashing higher value things because I assume you'll want to give out cheap and nasty things? Catapult does the treasure-trashing attack already, I'm a bit tired now so I'm probably missing something though.

Yes I started writing a post a while ago but I lost it somehow and haven't quite found time to have another look, there's a lot of stuff I like skimming through again. I'll try and gather my thoughts soon, it's taken me about 3 hours to write this so maybe not now though!
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on December 17, 2017, 09:39:00 pm
Let's go through how Caretaker trashes a Gold (purposefully ignoring the back-gaining here):
1. You get to 6$ where you could have bought a 5$ instead.
2. You forego playing that Gold once where you could have played that 5$ instead.
3. You now have 2$ s, having played none, where without Caretaker, you would have one 5$ and whatever its effect gives you.

My gut feeling tells me that Caretaker is great in the endgame to cannibalize your deck for Duchies or if there is Goldspecific gaining (other than Caretaker itself).
On the other hand, Caretaker comes up too late to help you boost your deck early. Gaining Caretaker itself counts against the possible purchases you could have made this turn, and having it in your deck isn't all that great if you miss a target. And worst of all, you might run into the situation that the 5$ you wanted and could have bought before is now hidden under a Lock. I'm not sure how often the exact opposite will apply, that is, you gain Gold because the better cards are locked, and then can get two at once.

Did you consider Lock just being its own pile without Caretaker, and the Heirloom just being "gain a Lock" (expressed to overwrite Lock's text) or "trash a Lock from the supply or gain a Lock from the trash"?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 17, 2017, 09:46:39 pm
Did you consider Lock just being its own pile without Caretaker, and the Heirloom just being "gain a Lock" (expressed to overwrite Lock's text) or "trash a Lock from the supply or gain a Lock from the trash"?

I did. 10 Locks flying around the Kingdom would overegg the pudding a bit, don't you agree?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 19, 2017, 05:58:36 pm
Okay I had it my mind that you had about 50 cards here but it's actually only about 20, which is much more reasonable to go through. I was probably getting confused between you and Asper because you're the Seasons guys.

Realm Tax: I like that this doesn't fall into the trap of giving +$1 per action in play, that would get ridiculous fast. I also like kingdom treasures that give some utility other than just money and this gives +1 buy which is nice. It seems like a strong card in an engine, Contraband without the restrictions, but you would prefer to buy it later, but then it'll be expensive later so you want to buy it sooner, but then it's just a Pouch which isn't great. I really like this actually. Only real nitpick is the name, because the card has nothing to with the Tax Event, but I can see the logic behind the name. This is a great start though!

Refugees: The top is decent, I don't think there's a card in Dominion that let's you pick the same thing twice like this does so that's something unique. It seems fairly strong for a $2 cantrip actually, +2 actions can be powerful at the right moment. The bottom is interesting, I guess it makes it hard to gain a bunch of these but also means the pile is always empty after you get one, so you have to watch out for those 3 piles! I wonder if the Refugees could just start out in the trash instead of on the mat. Interaction with other cards should be rare (just Lurker and Necromancer right?) and removes the need for the mat. I suppose you've probably already thought of that though!

Salesman: Woooo Prime token! I have no idea how strong the effect of moving the prime token is. Calling this is like playing a Highway, which is great but obviously balanced by this being a crummy terminal on the previous turn (or whenever you played it). Oh and I guess the point is that the Prime token is unaffected by the cost change so you can make something expensive and then call these and Remodel it into something big, or make it so your opponent can't make it cheaper with their Salesmen. My guess is that this can be nice on the right board, but is weak without support, which is a totally fine place for a $2 to be. Hard to say without playing with it.

Trapper/ Forest Hut: I'm not sure about this one, I think I would open 3 of these with the Forest Hut almost every time. It seems kinda similar to Urchin in that it's correct to open with them most of the time and then hope yours line up bettter than your opponents. I like that this costs $2 so Forest Hut can let you get more, but Forest Hut is a bit less exciting now that Heirlooms (Pouch mainly) are a thing. Also I assume that Forest Hut replaces the same shelter for each player? I wouldn't be thrilled if  I lost my Necropolis and my opponent lost their Hovel.

Deposit: This seems quite strong, although I suppose it's hard to make a weak trasher. It trashes 2-3 cards on turn 3 or 4 and then becomes worse as you add more cards to your deck. I don't see the second ability being relevant all that often - apart from this trashing itself. I would guess this is slightly weaker than Steward, but pretty similar in terms of powerlevel and how it plays out (strong trasher that has another use later on). Oh wait it has a below the line - the second part seems more relevant now, I retract that statement. I would guess that 3 piles rarely happen in games with this still.

Provisioner: A non-terminal draw to X thing that gets a bit better when piles empty. The novelty is a little bit lessened by Cursed Village, but this is an uncommon ability anyway so that's not too bad. Based on my experience with Cursed Village I'm going to assume that this is weak, at least until a pile empties. The on-gain is really nice though, so the card should probably be weak to compensate for that. Seems really nice on a $3/$4 open.

Builder/Battlement: Builder's on-play effect seems fine, a mini Embassy. Weird that a card that says +4 cards on it doesn't increase your handsize. It seems on the weaker side of things, but I guess it's one of those things that is stronger when your deck is worse. I doubt Builder BM is ever a thing. I'm not sure on the whole Battlements thing though, you can only get them if your opponent plays an attack, which is already super swingy, especially with junkers and then the battlements can destroy discard attacks or if there's other stuff going on it can destroy the duration attacks too and then there's nothing to track the duration effect. I don't know, maybe it plays out differently to what I'm envisioning, you'll have to convince me on this one.

Mining Camp: This is a weird one. It reminds me of Leprechaun a bit, as a cheap Gold gainer with a penalty that's a bit random when you play it. Gaining a Ruins to hand and playing it is almost like a Boon, apart from that it junks you of course. This being a village is a bit weird at first, but I suppose that is to let you play the Ruin. I don't think the Gold gain has to stop when Ruins run out, I doubt that is too strong? I'd rather have a Silver than a Gold+Ruins a lot of the time so I doubt this is very strong. I have to say I do like the overpay on this though. It avoids the Counting House problem because it's on-gain, very nice.

Orphanage: This seems crazy! The on-play is already really strong and you get a free Silver? Topdecked as well? Crazy! Madness!

Reconvert: Crazy! This is so much better than Salvager, who needs that stupid +buy anyway? Seriously though, this is super powerful because of the versatility.

Reeve: Ah, the $4 village with a marginal bonus, a true dominion classic. There's actually a bit of tricky play with the Estates on the opening turns, depending on whether you want to shuffle on turn 1 or not. That could be cool, I'd be very interested to play with that. I doubt you gain Estates with this very often, but I suppose just starting the game with 3 Action-Estates increases the value of a village. How does this interact with Inheritance? I assume you move the token and Estates become the inherited thing? I guess this marks the end of the crazy cards too.

Shire: I live in shire, well I guess it's a metropolitan borough now, but historically it was a shire! Ah it's like a Smugglers type thing, but it's easier to track which is nice. But it can't gain Duchies so boo. But it's non-terminal which is nice. It'll be worth at least 1VP and often 3. Seems strong to me, and maybe crazy.

Beachcomb: Hmmm can this lead to infinite combos? Oh can it not discard any Beachcombs, or just itself? I think that could be a bit clearer on the card. I guess it can't discard any Beachcombs because otherwise you can get infinite VP with Monument and Bustling Village or a +1 action token. Not sure I'm a fan of that ability in general though honestly, seems like a pain to track. The on-gain is weird too, I guess it's useful with mid-turn gaining or Horn of Plenty or something? Seems like the kind of thing tht would be better suited on a card that can trigger it itself.

Benefit: Seems at it's best with a $2 cantrip on the board to pick up with a $5, or a good $3 and $4 card. It seems potent on the right board, but quite well balanced to me. I wonder if the reaction should exchange the gained card now that that's more of a thing? I suspect that if Trader was a new card in Nocturne it would exchange the gained card for a Silver.

Building Crane: Did I already talk about this one, or was that a different version? $5 is steep for a one-shot, although it does make itself cheaper. This might be crazy with +buys?

Juggler: This is odd, you'll return the Curse unless you need that $2 or have something else to do with the Curse. Keeping a Curse around to try and block opponents Juggler seems bad. It's weak next to Witch and Mountebank but I suppose they're pretty good so that's fine and there are tricks to do with this so it might be fun.

Reparations: If you gain a card with this and empty a pile do you get +$2? The "at the time you play it" wording is confusing me. If you aren't supposed to then I'd switch around the abilities so the +$ ability is on top. This is weak until it starts giving money, but it's a gainer so it's going to have utility when that's a good thing to be doing. I like it apart from the confusion.

Revaluate: Isn't the word Reevaluate? Anyway, I'm a big fan of Remodels. I still don't know how strong moving the Prime token is but this is obvs way weaker than Butcher (what card isn't though?) and seems weaker than Replace to me, but Replace is super good so that's okay too. I also could very easily be underestimating the Prime token. I think the idea is to make an action expensive with the token and then trash it to turn this into an Expand. Graverobber expands actions, but this can also trash other things too. I'll have to play with these Prime token cards to get an idea on how good/fun they are.

Riverside: I used to live on a riverside, although it was in the middle of a city so it wasn't as nice as this one. I suppose you would have to do a calculation, but I guess in most kingdoms this will end up being 4VP without too much work.  I guess the Prime token movement isn't that strong then, because this is usually worth enough VP to justify the $6 cost?

Chancellery: Very similar to Obelisk, but it makes the pile cost more, which is cool. Then in games with Prime token cards this becomes more tricky. Maybe you could have this in the setup of a Prime token card because that seems like the most interesting case for this, to make sure it's different enough from Obelisk. I can see why you wouldn't want to do that though and this is fine as is anyway.

I'll talk about Petty Lord another time because there's so much going on there.

In terms of an overall set I think it could do with another terminal draw card? We normally get about 2 per expansion I think, right? Not much terminal payload either actually, like your Wine Merchants and your Farmers Markets and your Sacred Groves and the like. There's a good number of villages and trashers though. Well there's a lot of stuff I like here, the cards seem pretty coherent with clear concepts for the most part. A few things I'm not convinced by and a couple that I think are crazy. Nocturne might have made a few a little redundant too, but nothing glaring there. I would love a Peddler variant too, everybody loves those! That was my main gripe with Nocturne, although I suppose 2nd edition base is now 50% Peddler variants so I guess we needed a break from that. Oh and this a tree card to justify the Roots and Renewal name. Err well there's my thoughts, hopefully you find them at least slightly useful! Feel free to tell me that I'm an idiot too, if I've just said a load of rubbish.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 20, 2017, 03:35:31 am
Okay I had it my mind that you had about 50 cards here but it's actually only about 20, which is much more reasonable to go through. I was probably getting confused between you and Asper because you're the Seasons guys.
Thank you very much for taking the time again to give me feedback! I wish I could give your post multiple likes for each phrase I enjoyed reading :D

Realm Tax: I like that this doesn't fall into the trap of giving +$1 per action in play, that would get ridiculous fast. I also like kingdom treasures that give some utility other than just money and this gives +1 buy which is nice. It seems like a strong card in an engine, Contraband without the restrictions, but you would prefer to buy it later, but then it'll be expensive later so you want to buy it sooner, but then it's just a Pouch which isn't great. I really like this actually. Only real nitpick is the name, because the card has nothing to with the Tax Event, but I can see the logic behind the name. This is a great start though!
This is an old card that predates even Adventures, and I never got around to changing its name. Although itís a fitting name, still. Back in the day it used to trigger with 3 actions in play which was too good but with 4 in recent games I rarely got it activated. But then Iím not the best Dominion player and probably overbought this card often.
Did you notice it actually counts ALL actions in play, even those of other players? I used to think this was clever and unique but in practise nobody notices it until thereís another playerís duration in play and Iím like, ďOh, I almost forgot, again!Ē So Iím inclined to remove the counting actions of other players.

Refugees: The top is decent, I don't think there's a card in Dominion that let's you pick the same thing twice like this does so that's something unique. It seems fairly strong for a $2 cantrip actually, +2 actions can be powerful at the right moment. The bottom is interesting, I guess it makes it hard to gain a bunch of these but also means the pile is always empty after you get one, so you have to watch out for those 3 piles! I wonder if the Refugees could just start out in the trash instead of on the mat. Interaction with other cards should be rare (just Lurker and Necromancer right?) and removes the need for the mat. I suppose you've probably already thought of that though!
I havenít thought about putting them in the trash but I suppose it would work with the same line of text. Even though in our test games on Tabletop simulator Refugees never actually sat on a mat but right next to the Supply, I wouldnít mind removing the need for a mat rules-wise altogether. Iíll definitely try it!

Salesman: Woooo Prime token! I have no idea how strong the effect of moving the prime token is. Calling this is like playing a Highway, which is great but obviously balanced by this being a crummy terminal on the previous turn (or whenever you played it). Oh and I guess the point is that the Prime token is unaffected by the cost change so you can make something expensive and then call these and Remodel it into something big, or make it so your opponent can't make it cheaper with their Salesmen. My guess is that this can be nice on the right board, but is weak without support, which is a totally fine place for a $2 to be. Hard to say without playing with it.
Thereís a newer version of Salesman that can be found two or three pages back. It has a more unique mechanic, other than the prime token itself, but itís even more situational which is why I didnít put it up as the ĒofficialĒ version, yet.

Trapper/ Forest Hut: I'm not sure about this one, I think I would open 3 of these with the Forest Hut almost every time. It seems kinda similar to Urchin in that it's correct to open with them most of the time and then hope yours line up bettter than your opponents. I like that this costs $2 so Forest Hut can let you get more, but Forest Hut is a bit less exciting now that Heirlooms (Pouch mainly) are a thing. Also I assume that Forest Hut replaces the same shelter for each player? I wouldn't be thrilled if  I lost my Necropolis and my opponent lost their Hovel.
Before there were Heirlooms, Trapper was hot stuff! (Also it was named Poacher, then Tracker, briefly.) Itís still a good opener, but you have to get at least three which sometimes just isnít an option, e.g. with powerful $5-cost cards around. If you didnít open with Trappers, you will never buy any for the whole game.
Of course every player replaces the same Shelter. An unprinted update of Trapper simply uses a red band saying ďShelter: Forest HutĒ and thereís a rulebook line in my mind saying itís random each game but the same for all within that game.

Deposit: This seems quite strong, although I suppose it's hard to make a weak trasher. It trashes 2-3 cards on turn 3 or 4 and then becomes worse as you add more cards to your deck. I don't see the second ability being relevant all that often - apart from this trashing itself. I would guess this is slightly weaker than Steward, but pretty similar in terms of powerlevel and how it plays out (strong trasher that has another use later on). Oh wait it has a below the line - the second part seems more relevant now, I retract that statement. I would guess that 3 piles rarely happen in games with this still.
The effect below the line is the whole point of the card. The top part is just a way to interact with it. Balancing is less of an issue but I want this card to be fun. Weíll see about that.

Provisioner: A non-terminal draw to X thing that gets a bit better when piles empty. The novelty is a little bit lessened by Cursed Village, but this is an uncommon ability anyway so that's not too bad. Based on my experience with Cursed Village I'm going to assume that this is weak, at least until a pile empties. The on-gain is really nice though, so the card should probably be weak to compensate for that. Seems really nice on a $3/$4 open.
Cursed Village is strong, man! Very strong! That said, Provisioner isnít, and thatís fine because its on-gain ability is powerful. It rewards you for good deck-building as itís hight synergistic (like CV!).

Builder/Battlement: Builder's on-play effect seems fine, a mini Embassy. Weird that a card that says +4 cards on it doesn't increase your handsize. It seems on the weaker side of things, but I guess it's one of those things that is stronger when your deck is worse. I doubt Builder BM is ever a thing. I'm not sure on the whole Battlements thing though, you can only get them if your opponent plays an attack, which is already super swingy, especially with junkers and then the battlements can destroy discard attacks or if there's other stuff going on it can destroy the duration attacks too and then there's nothing to track the duration effect. I don't know, maybe it plays out differently to what I'm envisioning, you'll have to convince me on this one.
Yeah, I donít know either. The original premise was a reaction card that trashes only trashing attack. Saboteur is gone now, it sucks with Warrior and backfire really hard with the War hex. So I changed it but this is probably too harsh. Builder and Battlement are on the brink of being scratched from the set if I canít find a new and fun mechanic for them.

Mining Camp: This is a weird one. It reminds me of Leprechaun a bit, as a cheap Gold gainer with a penalty that's a bit random when you play it. Gaining a Ruins to hand and playing it is almost like a Boon, apart from that it junks you of course. This being a village is a bit weird at first, but I suppose that is to let you play the Ruin. I don't think the Gold gain has to stop when Ruins run out, I doubt that is too strong? I'd rather have a Silver than a Gold+Ruins a lot of the time so I doubt this is very strong. I have to say I do like the overpay on this though. It avoids the Counting House problem because it's on-gain, very nice.
Mining Camp has so many versions in consideration. If I had the time, I would test them all. Youíre right, this is weak. You gotta really desperately want a Village to even buy this one. This is mainly about the Overpay effect and I can probably come up with a better top part for that.

Orphanage: This seems crazy! The on-play is already really strong and you get a free Silver? Topdecked as well? Crazy! Madness!
Itís not as crazy as you think. It decreases your hand size while only trashing one card, doesnít thin your deck before the third shuffle (because it adds a Silver) and gives a weak bonus compared to other one-card trashers.

Reconvert: Crazy! This is so much better than Salvager, who needs that stupid +buy anyway? Seriously though, this is super powerful because of the versatility.
Not crazy! Itís one of my oldest cards and I rarely buy it nowadays because thereís usually something better available. Itís not even close to Apprentice in power level, using it as a splitter is dissatisfying, and Iím not even sure Iíd buy this over Salvager in the opening.

Reeve: Ah, the $4 village with a marginal bonus, a true dominion classic. There's actually a bit of tricky play with the Estates on the opening turns, depending on whether you want to shuffle on turn 1 or not. That could be cool, I'd be very interested to play with that. I doubt you gain Estates with this very often, but I suppose just starting the game with 3 Action-Estates increases the value of a village. How does this interact with Inheritance? I assume you move the token and Estates become the inherited thing? I guess this marks the end of the crazy cards too.
Reeve is a blast! :D I stuck with simple top here because the Estate thing will still be crazy to some, despite Inheritance. And yes, you can only have your Estate token on one card at a time. Inheritance permanently moves it off Manor.
Itís funny how you perceive most of my cheap cards as crazy ^^ My more expensive cards are more reasonable, I assume?

Beachcomb: Hmmm can this lead to infinite combos? Oh can it not discard any Beachcombs, or just itself? I think that could be a bit clearer on the card. I guess it can't discard any Beachcombs because otherwise you can get infinite VP with Monument and Bustling Village or a +1 action token. Not sure I'm a fan of that ability in general though honestly, seems like a pain to track. The on-gain is weird too, I guess it's useful with mid-turn gaining or Horn of Plenty or something? Seems like the kind of thing tht would be better suited on a card that can trigger it itself.
This card exists because I wanted to try the bottom part and my set needed terminal draw badly. Discarding three cards from play might be overdoing it though. I might limit it to one and make the on-gain better to balance it out.

Benefit: Seems at it's best with a $2 cantrip on the board to pick up with a $5, or a good $3 and $4 card. It seems potent on the right board, but quite well balanced to me. I wonder if the reaction should exchange the gained card now that that's more of a thing? I suspect that if Trader was a new card in Nocturne it would exchange the gained card for a Silver.
One of my oldest cards that just always worked. Also my personal favourite. You got the gist of it pretty accurately. I will change the wording probably.

Building Crane: Did I already talk about this one, or was that a different version? $5 is steep for a one-shot, although it does make itself cheaper. This might be crazy with +buys?
Thereís already a different Building Crane that tries to solve its problems in alpha stage. This just sits here as a placeholder, to be honest.

Juggler: This is odd, you'll return the Curse unless you need that $2 or have something else to do with the Curse. Keeping a Curse around to try and block opponents Juggler seems bad. It's weak next to Witch and Mountebank but I suppose they're pretty good so that's fine and there are tricks to do with this so it might be fun.
Old card, and well-tried. Itís outclassed by the attacks you mentioned but thatís no surprise. Apart from that itís always relevant in a Kingdom and fun to play with.

Reparations: If you gain a card with this and empty a pile do you get +$2? The "at the time you play it" wording is confusing me. If you aren't supposed to then I'd switch around the abilities so the +$ ability is on top. This is weak until it starts giving money, but it's a gainer so it's going to have utility when that's a good thing to be doing. I like it apart from the confusion.
The ďat the time you play itĒ clause is trying to avoid confusion but I guess it fails at that. The gaining part is on top to make it stronger; it triggers off itself if you empty a pile with it. Maybe thatís not worth the confusion. I could swap it around and give it another slight buff. If it even needs oneÖ

Riverside: I used to live on a riverside, although it was in the middle of a city so it wasn't as nice as this one. I suppose you would have to do a calculation, but I guess in most kingdoms this will end up being 4VP without too much work.  I guess the Prime token movement isn't that strong then, because this is usually worth enough VP to justify the $6 cost?
This comment and the one on Shire made me chuckle. Not much to say about either. Riverside should really just be worth 1 VP per different cost not make it less swingy.

Chancellery: Very similar to Obelisk, but it makes the pile cost more, which is cool. Then in games with Prime token cards this becomes more tricky. Maybe you could have this in the setup of a Prime token card because that seems like the most interesting case for this, to make sure it's different enough from Obelisk. I can see why you wouldn't want to do that though and this is fine as is anyway.
I agree with your last sentiment.

In terms of an overall set I think it could do with another terminal draw card? We normally get about 2 per expansion I think, right? Not much terminal payload either actually, like your Wine Merchants and your Farmers Markets and your Sacred Groves and the like. There's a good number of villages and trashers though. Well there's a lot of stuff I like here, the cards seem pretty coherent with clear concepts for the most part. A few things I'm not convinced by and a couple that I think are crazy. Nocturne might have made a few a little redundant too, but nothing glaring there. I would love a Peddler variant too, everybody loves those! That was my main gripe with Nocturne, although I suppose 2nd edition base is now 50% Peddler variants so I guess we needed a break from that. Oh and this a tree card to justify the Roots and Renewal name. Err well there's my thoughts, hopefully you find them at least slightly useful! Feel free to tell me that I'm an idiot too, if I've just said a load of rubbish.
Thank you again!
Roots and Renewal is supposed to be large expansion which should have three terminal draw cards. Currently it has four that donít discard: Refugees, Beachcomb, Juggler and Warlord but Beachcomb is the only one that draws at least 3 cards AND is available from the start of the game. The set also has other draw, like Builder, Provisioner, Reconvert, Building Crane and Savior. Two of these might get switched out, though.
Youíre right in that my set could use more payload cards, and Iím currently working on some. Caretaker is in alpha state and wants testing. More are on their way.
Thereís still a lot of room for improvement. Iím very critical of my own cards and would rework them even more often if I had the time. Eventually, I want there to be 30 good, fun and balanced cards.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 20, 2017, 02:14:21 pm
Orphanage: This seems crazy! The on-play is already really strong and you get a free Silver? Topdecked as well? Crazy! Madness!
Itís not as crazy as you think. It decreases your hand size while only trashing one card, doesnít thin your deck before the third shuffle (because it adds a Silver) and gives a weak bonus compared to other one-card trashers.

Reconvert: Crazy! This is so much better than Salvager, who needs that stupid +buy anyway? Seriously though, this is super powerful because of the versatility.
Not crazy! Itís one of my oldest cards and I rarely buy it nowadays because thereís usually something better available. Itís not even close to Apprentice in power level, using it as a splitter is dissatisfying, and Iím not even sure Iíd buy this over Salvager in the opening.

I should probably elaborate on these a little more, you can probably tell where my concentration waxes and wanes depending on when I was writing.

Orphanage: The on-play is similar to Forager, but I'd say it's better. That's what Woodcutter and Monument are telling me anyway, and I guess VP chips stack better than +buy too, which is more important on a non-terminal card. The main thing Forager has over this is that it costs $3, so you can open 2 but wait this topdecks a Silver so you will often be able to open with 2 of these too. The main drawback of early trashers is the tempo loss, mainly that it's hard to hit $5 if you open with them (this is why Masq is so good, no tempo loss) but man that topdecked Silver is a massive boost to tempo! What 1 card trashers at similar price points are you comparing it too? I guess Spice Merchant is better, but that can't trash Estates and doesn't give you a free Silver. Masq is better but Masq is like top 5 crazy cards of all time. I don't think it's ruins the game crazy like Cultist is sometimes (ruins the game get it?). It's more Remake, Masquerade, Spice Merchant: "wow what a great trasher" crazy.

Reconvert: This is so much better than Salvager in the opening because of +2 cards, it's very difficult to make a card that trashes and draws and for it to not be crazy. Do you rarely buy it because there's something better, or because there's something you think is better? Apprentice is obscene so there is a lot of room for this to be crazy and not be close to Apprentice. Anyway, this has power and versatility in spades so it's crazy in my book.

Edit: I had a couple more things I was going to say, but I had to go.

I didn't realise Realm Tax counted everyone's cards, seems busted in 3+ player games with durations and hard to remember so I would say remove that.

Oh yeah Cursed Village is pretty overrated, it sucks with terminal draw, which is usually the best thing to do with villages, it's expensive, occasionally Delusion makes you lose the game and it needs specific cards to be an engine itself. I've found it really situational - although if it's the only village you'll still go for it. But I probably shouldn't be talking about Cursed Village here... I think Provisioner is fine though.

Reparations would be fine without the "at the time you play it" clause I think. I thought it was saying that at the time you play it you haven't gained the card yet, so if that empties the pile then don't count that, but if it does count a pile that it empties itself then it doesn't  need the clause.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 20, 2017, 06:56:02 pm
Orphanage: This seems crazy! The on-play is already really strong and you get a free Silver? Topdecked as well? Crazy! Madness!
Itís not as crazy as you think. It decreases your hand size while only trashing one card, doesnít thin your deck before the third shuffle (because it adds a Silver) and gives a weak bonus compared to other one-card trashers.

Reconvert: Crazy! This is so much better than Salvager, who needs that stupid +buy anyway? Seriously though, this is super powerful because of the versatility.
Not crazy! Itís one of my oldest cards and I rarely buy it nowadays because thereís usually something better available. Itís not even close to Apprentice in power level, using it as a splitter is dissatisfying, and Iím not even sure Iíd buy this over Salvager in the opening.

I should probably elaborate on these a little more, you can probably tell where my concentration waxes and wanes depending on when I was writing.

Orphanage: The on-play is similar to Forager, but I'd say it's better. That's what Woodcutter and Monument are telling me anyway, and I guess VP chips stack better than +buy too, which is more important on a non-terminal card. The main thing Forager has over this is that it costs $3, so you can open 2 but wait this topdecks a Silver so you will often be able to open with 2 of these too. The main drawback of early trashers is the tempo loss, mainly that it's hard to hit $5 if you open with them (this is why Masq is so good, no tempo loss) but man that topdecked Silver is a massive boost to tempo! What 1 card trashers at similar price points are you comparing it too? I guess Spice Merchant is better, but that can't trash Estates and doesn't give you a free Silver. Masq is better but Masq is like top 5 crazy cards of all time. I don't think it's ruins the game crazy like Cultist is sometimes (ruins the game get it?). It's more Remake, Masquerade, Spice Merchant: "wow what a great trasher" crazy.

Reconvert: This is so much better than Salvager in the opening because of +2 cards, it's very difficult to make a card that trashes and draws and for it to not be crazy. Do you rarely buy it because there's something better, or because there's something you think is better? Apprentice is obscene so there is a lot of room for this to be crazy and not be close to Apprentice. Anyway, this has power and versatility in spades so it's crazy in my book.

You're probably right about Orphanage. Would it still be crazy if it couldn't trash Treasures? It would obviously still be a great opener but maybe not for two of them. It might also somewhat discourage you from cursing if the curser doesn't accelerate deck building, like Sea Hag.

Perhaps I'm actually underestimating Reconvert or the recent games with it also happened to include cards like Masquerade, Steward and Forager. Either way you still have to convince me it's too powerful at $4 because as I see it, it's not strictly better than any similar $4-cost card. Are you even saying it's imbalanced? If so, would it be balanced with an on-gain penalty like "topdeck a card" or "each other may trash a card from their hand"?
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 20, 2017, 09:30:09 pm
Orphanage: This seems crazy! The on-play is already really strong and you get a free Silver? Topdecked as well? Crazy! Madness!
Itís not as crazy as you think. It decreases your hand size while only trashing one card, doesnít thin your deck before the third shuffle (because it adds a Silver) and gives a weak bonus compared to other one-card trashers.

Reconvert: Crazy! This is so much better than Salvager, who needs that stupid +buy anyway? Seriously though, this is super powerful because of the versatility.
Not crazy! Itís one of my oldest cards and I rarely buy it nowadays because thereís usually something better available. Itís not even close to Apprentice in power level, using it as a splitter is dissatisfying, and Iím not even sure Iíd buy this over Salvager in the opening.

I should probably elaborate on these a little more, you can probably tell where my concentration waxes and wanes depending on when I was writing.

Orphanage: The on-play is similar to Forager, but I'd say it's better. That's what Woodcutter and Monument are telling me anyway, and I guess VP chips stack better than +buy too, which is more important on a non-terminal card. The main thing Forager has over this is that it costs $3, so you can open 2 but wait this topdecks a Silver so you will often be able to open with 2 of these too. The main drawback of early trashers is the tempo loss, mainly that it's hard to hit $5 if you open with them (this is why Masq is so good, no tempo loss) but man that topdecked Silver is a massive boost to tempo! What 1 card trashers at similar price points are you comparing it too? I guess Spice Merchant is better, but that can't trash Estates and doesn't give you a free Silver. Masq is better but Masq is like top 5 crazy cards of all time. I don't think it's ruins the game crazy like Cultist is sometimes (ruins the game get it?). It's more Remake, Masquerade, Spice Merchant: "wow what a great trasher" crazy.

Reconvert: This is so much better than Salvager in the opening because of +2 cards, it's very difficult to make a card that trashes and draws and for it to not be crazy. Do you rarely buy it because there's something better, or because there's something you think is better? Apprentice is obscene so there is a lot of room for this to be crazy and not be close to Apprentice. Anyway, this has power and versatility in spades so it's crazy in my book.

You're probably right about Orphanage. Would it still be crazy if it couldn't trash Treasures? It would obviously still be a great opener but maybe not for two of them. It might also somewhat discourage you from cursing if the curser doesn't accelerate deck building, like Sea Hag.

Perhaps I'm actually underestimating Reconvert or the recent games with it also happened to include cards like Masquerade, Steward and Forager. Either way you still have to convince me it's too powerful at $4 because as I see it, it's not strictly better than any similar $4-cost card. Are you even saying it's imbalanced? If so, would it be balanced with an on-gain penalty like "topdeck a card" or "each other may trash a card from their hand"?

I guess it depends on how fun they are, I doubt either of them is as ridiculous as Remake, it's not like they'd break the game or anything. So if they're fun then it doesn't matter so much that they're powerful. Orphanage would be so much worse if it couldn't trash treasures, maybe not useless but it would become more like Jack than an actual deck thinner because it's replacing one Estate with a Silver, the other with itself and only thinning you by 1 card.

Oh and you have tabletop simulator? I'd be interested in playing some test games with you if you have time for that sort of thing.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Co0kieL0rd on December 23, 2017, 08:17:13 pm
I want to have Night cards in Roots and Renewal, and I've finally come up with a few that seem novel enough to me to consider. Here are two ideas I'd like to try but first it's time for eager fan card enthusiasts to point out any issues with these cards I missed.

(https://i.imgur.com/ZVYc05W.png)   (https://i.imgur.com/NDaamXU.jpg)

Quote
Pawnshop, <5>, Night
Remove up to <2> you have. Take a Coin token per <1> removed.
Setup: When a player buys a card, they take the <> from its pile.
Heirloom: Ancient Coin

Quote
Ancient Coin, $0, Treasure/Heirloom
$1. When you play this, add <2> to a Supply pile.

Something that came to my mind very early when thinking about things that can be done best in the Night phase is to pay off debt. Obviously there's no official card that does this (yet) because it would use mechanics from two different expansions (Empires and Nocturne). This even throws a third expansion in the mix by adding Coin tokens (Guilds). The Heirloom is there so that this card isn't worthless without other Supply cards that give debt.
My main concern with Pawnshop is it might be a little swingy if you don't line it up with your Ancient Coin and the next player gets to convert the debt tokens you placed with their Pawnshop. Actually the swing from 2 debt to 2 coin tokens is quite huge - better than having +$4! And there might be no way to balance it because if you're unlucky, it gives you literally nothing. It wouldn't change much in that regard if Pawnshop converted debt into +cards or VP, either. Is there a way to make converting debt during Night consistently useful?

(https://i.imgur.com/R74H4Bw.png)

Quote
Secret Plan, $5, Night/Reaction
Trash a card you have in play, to gain a card costing exactly $1 more to your hand.
When another player plays a Night card, you may first play this from your hand as if it were a copy of that card until it leaves play.

Secret Plan looks very strong compared to Cobbler and even Upgrade but it can't do all the things these do, not getting to use the gained card during your action phase being the biggest downside. The reaction, however, could turn this into a turbo Transmogrify at least, and interact very favorably with other Night cards. I don't think it's broken, though, and it looks like fun to me!
I realize the wording on this card could use some work.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Gazbag on December 24, 2017, 10:50:23 am
Pawnshop: This has a problem where it's useless if you have no debt, okay if you pay off 1 debt and amazing if you pay off 2 debt. I think this needs to do something when you don't have debt and then not reward you more for paying the debt - paying the debt should be the reward itself. Is paying off debt like this actually different enough to just getting money earlier in the turn? Or maybe it could be a night-action and pay off the debt at night and do something else as an action, there probably wouldn't be enough room for an Heirloom then though so I guess the action would have to involve debt in that case.

Ancient Coin: Haha I find the art amusing, I use coins like that all the time! Does this give the first player to play theirs too much of an advantage? Also do you have a rule for if there are 8 Heirloom cards in a kingdom? 11 card starting deck could be fun.

Secret Plan: A night card gaining to had is a bit strange because you can only play nights at night. I guess if your opponent plays a Secret Plan you can react this to trash itself? You won't have other cards in play all that often. Trashing durations has tracking sadness but Procession is worse for that and still exists. Oh and I don't think this is anywhere near as good as Upgrade, I wouldn't worry about that. I love the name and the Night/Reaction colour scheme too.
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Asper on December 24, 2017, 08:00:05 pm
I think this
Quote
When a player buys a card, they take the <> from its pile.

belongs on Ancient Coin, not a Setup text. I like the idea behind Ancient Coin , but I don't like the first player advantage, even if you can't use it on the card you want yourself.

Pawn Shop isn't my cup of tea. It has this weird "get a reward for collecting inherently bad stuff" that those awful "Curse interaction" cards have going on. Such cards are absurdly annoying if they miss their target, as you aren't just lacking the payoff for the efforts you went through, you actively screw yourself over. It's kinda like a VP card that says "+500 VP if after counting all other VP, you have the lowest score below 0." Yeah, it works, you can play towards that, make a strategy out of it, but it creates this super weird "do something bad because that one card makes it good" situation where you arguably play the same game anymore. I'm being overly dramatic, but I think rewarding you for having debt means that people have to decide between a minigame and the actual game (not like e.g. Haunted Mirror, where you can incorporate the minigame in the main game perfectly well).
Title: Re: Dominion: Roots and Renewal
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 12:00:02 pm
I love your expansion symbol. Also, really nice cards. I especially like Building Crane and Mining Camp. Deposit seems like it could make games with Cursers or Looters take forever and be not so fun.
Edit: Wow, I just realized how old this thread was.