Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: tristan on July 07, 2016, 02:37:31 am
-
Here is an idea that probably doesn't work. Could still be worthwhile to discuss it though.
So far all debt cards provide something now with delayed payment, be it cards that have debt costs or Capital. While it is not as thematic (Capital makes sense, you get the money now and gotta repay it later) it could still be mechanically interesting to reverse the order:
??
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)
Take 2(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png)
At the start of your next turn:
+ (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)
+1 Buy
This is probably too good. In the middle- and endgame you rather want 4 turns with 0$ and 4 turns with 8$ than 8 turns with 4$, hence the strength of cards like Tactician or Capital that transfer resources between turns.
If the card just provided 4$ in the second turn it seems inferior to Charm though. Charm has a second option and provides the 2$ immediately. On the other hand the resource transfer could compensate for that.
Of course there are rule issues with Treasure Durations. Technically the card probably needs to make it clear that it provides (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png) on the first turn and one could discuss whether the second-turn effect of a Treasure-Duration should happen at the beginning of the next turn or the next Buy phase. And there is this thing:
To not be wonky with cards like Counterfeit, it had to have an "if this is in play" clause on the next turn's +$2. (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13082.0)
-
Does it have to be a Treasure-Duration? Why can't you make it an Action-Duration with +1 Action? (I know that's not exactly the same, but I'm curious about your reasoning to go this way.)
-
Does it have to be a Treasure-Duration? Why can't you make it an Action-Duration with +1 Action? (I know that's not exactly the same, but I'm curious about your reasoning to go this way.)
Probably got the idea as the point of the card is like Capital coin transfer so Treasure seems more intuitive. It doesn't make a huge difference though whether you implement this via a Treasure or an Action.
-
I like it; it's kinda like nonterminal Tactician. It's weaker (+$5 as opposed to +5 cards, +1 action), but it also doesn't completely waste the current turn. The bonus for the next turn looks good; if this needs tweaking, I would increase/decrease the amount of debt it gives on play.
-
I like it; it's kinda like nonterminal Tactician. It's weaker (+$5 as opposed to +5 cards, +1 action), but it also doesn't completely waste the current turn. The bonus for the next turn looks good; if this needs tweaking, I would increase/decrease the amount of debt it gives on play.
Don't forget that this one DOES stack easily, unlike tactician, but also hurts more when stacked. And as for the counterfeit issues, isn't that issue still present with procession and durations? There isn't much point in avoiding it if it is fine to exist elsewhere.
-
I like it; it's kinda like nonterminal Tactician. It's weaker (+$5 as opposed to +5 cards, +1 action), but it also doesn't completely waste the current turn. The bonus for the next turn looks good; if this needs tweaking, I would increase/decrease the amount of debt it gives on play.
Don't forget that this one DOES stack easily, unlike tactician, but also hurts more when stacked. And as for the counterfeit issues, isn't that issue still present with procession and durations? There isn't much point in avoiding it if it is fine to exist elsewhere.
I think that Donald's "if this is in play" suffices to avoid rule issues with Counterfeit.
About the card, my first hunch is that +5 is too strong and +4 too weak but as usual only playtesting will reveal how strong/weak the card really is.
-
I like it; it's kinda like nonterminal Tactician. It's weaker (+$5 as opposed to +5 cards, +1 action), but it also doesn't completely waste the current turn. The bonus for the next turn looks good; if this needs tweaking, I would increase/decrease the amount of debt it gives on play.
Don't forget that this one DOES stack easily, unlike tactician, but also hurts more when stacked. And as for the counterfeit issues, isn't that issue still present with procession and durations? There isn't much point in avoiding it if it is fine to exist elsewhere.
I think that Donald's "if this is in play" suffices to avoid rule issues with Counterfeit.
I still don't think it is necessary. The same thing exists when using procession on existing action-durations. There is no problem with that, so why would there be a problem with counterfeit on treasure-durations? I just don't see it.
Also, thought of a name for the card: Investment. You pay a little now, then get a lot back from it.
-
I think the concept has merit....but maybe this need work.
At the moment it isn't especially different from:
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 5
At the start of your next turn:
+ $3
+ 1 Buy
Which frankly is not worth $5.
How about:
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
-
I think the concept has merit....but maybe this need work.
At the moment it isn't especially different from:
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 5
At the start of your next turn:
+ $3
+ 1 Buy
Which frankly is not worth $5.
How about:
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
I believe the point was to transfer resources from one turn to the next. Your version looks more fun, though.
-
I think the concept has merit....but maybe this need work.
At the moment it isn't especially different from:
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 5
At the start of your next turn:
+ $3
+ 1 Buy
This is probably OK for 5$ but it is weaker than my version for reasons I already pointed out. In the middle- and endgame you rather want coins pooled in a few turns (conditional upon having an extra buy which my card provides) than spread over several turns.
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
This is far too strong. Probably a 6$.
-
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
This is far too strong. Probably a 6$.
Really. Too strong?
This turn, $0, next turn $1, the turn after $4. The benefit is so delayed it has to be good. And remember that becuase it is such a long duration will miss many reshuffles and cycle very slowly. I think it is fun but probably not dominant.
Hmmmm....okay because it is a treasure it is easily spammable, okay i'll conceed that it may be a liiiiitle strong. I'll make it a terminal action instead, and i'll cut the +buy but I doubt it'll need to cost $5.
Now even if you have 3 perfectly offset you only get $5/turn from them, and playing 2 on the same turn to get the $8 every 3 turns needs village help.
Government Bonds
Action Duration - $4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+$4
-
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
This is far too strong. Probably a 6$.
Really. Too strong?
This turn, $0, next turn $1, the turn after $4. The benefit is so delayed it has to be good. And remember that becuase it is such a long duration will miss many reshuffles and cycle very slowly. I think it is fun but probably not dominant.
You are assuming here that you got no other coin generating stuff in play. What the card does is this turn -3, next turn and the turn after that +4. That's a coin equivalent of Platinum spread over 3 turns for a mere 4$. My card is just a Gold equivalent spread over two turns and I am pretty sure that it is too strong for 5$.
-
Type: Treasure-Duration
Cost: 4
When you play this take 3D
At the start of your next 2 turns:
+ $4
+ 1 Buy
This is far too strong. Probably a 6$.
Really. Too strong?
This turn, $0, next turn $1, the turn after $4. The benefit is so delayed it has to be good. And remember that becuase it is such a long duration will miss many reshuffles and cycle very slowly. I think it is fun but probably not dominant.
You are assuming here that you got no other coin generating stuff in play. What the card does is this turn -3, next turn and the turn after that +4. That's a coin equivalent of Platinum spread over 3 turns for a mere 4$. My card is just a Gold equivalent spread over two turns and I am pretty sure that it is too strong for 5$.
Swamp hag is a $5 with +$3 next turn and it dishes out Curses on top! I think you're really under estimating the negative impact of the delayed benefit.
You're right though in that thinking about my card as 0/1/4 isn't quite right. The debt can easily be paid off on the turn it is played giving you the spike sooner that I'd imagined. Maybe 4 or 5D would be better.
----------------------
Thinking further on it I'm not sure this is the most interesting way to take the 'reverse capital' concept. I.e. go into debt now for a future benefit. The duration mechanic + debt can allow you to delay a benefit with some fuzzy ground in how good the benefit will be in the future depending on how quickly you can pay off your debts. But that isn't fundamentally different to just a duration card. I think a reserve card would be a better approach.
'Literally Reverse Capital'
Action - Reserve
Take 6D
Put this on your tavern mat
-----------------------
If you have no debt you may call this for +$6 +1 buy
I have no idea what something like that should be priced at, and the debt and +$ could/should both be changed. It is radically worse than capital in most all situations but it does let you sets you up for mega-turns quite well. I also think it would be more interesting without the +buy, so that you need some help setting it up. A guess:
Government Bonds
Action - Reserve $4
Take 4D
Put this on your tavern mat
--------------------
If you have no debt tokens you may call this for +$6
Still seems weak if anything. You need to buy it, play it, pay off the debt, and then cash in. And even then it wont really be that good without support.
-
Swamp hag is a $5 with +$3 next turn and it dishes out Curses on top! I think you're really under estimating the negative impact of the delayed benefit.
And tristan's Reverse Capital is +$5 on the next turn, which is net $2 better than Swamp Hag. You can't subtract the debt from the next turn because the intent is to pay it off immediately. You're giving up a small advantage now for a big advantage later. It's the same principle that makes Tactician useful -- one big turn is better than two small turns.
'Literally Reverse Capital'
Action - Reserve
Take 6D
Put this on your tavern mat
-----------------------
If you have no debt you may call this for +$6 +1 buy
I have no idea what something like that should be priced at, and the debt and +$ could/should both be changed. It is radically worse than capital in most all situations but it does let you sets you up for mega-turns quite well.
Definitely not worse than Capital in most situations, just different. Making it a Reserve is actually a big boost because you can save it for when it will make a big impact, and you can even consolidate multiples into one big play.
-
Swamp hag is a $5 with +$3 next turn and it dishes out Curses on top! I think you're really under estimating the negative impact of the delayed benefit.
A pure +3$ Action is probably roughly a 5$. So if the coins come at the start of the next turn the card has to be improved somehow and this is via the optional cursing of Swamp Hag.
My card is quite different though. First of all it is a a Treasure so you can easily play multiples of them and the benchmark is Gold. Second, -2 this turn, +5 next turn is stronger than +3 next turn due to the pooling advantage; you rather want many coins in a few moves (if you have extra buys and it is the middle- / endgame) than your coins spread evenly.
About your Reserve variants, they are quite interesting.