Dominion Strategy Forum

Dominion => Variants and Fan Cards => Topic started by: Doom_Shark on September 17, 2018, 01:21:20 pm

Title: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 17, 2018, 01:21:20 pm
Hall of Fame (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19239.msg777727#msg777727)

The rules:

1. A challenge will have a set of requirements for the entries; entries must conform to the challenge

2. When not restricted by the challenge, custom card types and mechanics are allowed, provided that they are explained in the same post as the entry.

3. After roughly one week, the person who posted the challenge judges the entries, declaring a winner and one or two runners up.

4. The winner of a challenge posts the next challenge.

5. If the winner does not post within a reasonable amount of time, a runner-up may post the next challenge

6. It shouldn't need saying, but I'll say it anyway: a person may not post an entry to a challenge they set, and a person may only submit one entry to a challenge

7. Discussion of other entries is permitted, as well as changing your entries. If you change your entry, please do so as an edit to the post with your original entry and keep a changelog

With all of that out of the way:
Challenge #1: Design a Treasure - Reaction card! Keep in mind that if a reaction stays in your hand, you could, theoretically, reveal it again and again indefinitely
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on September 17, 2018, 04:00:52 pm
Inflation
$1

When another player gains a Treasure card costing at least $3, you may reveal this from your hand to have them exchange the gained card for a Treasure costing up to $3 less.
Treasure - Reaction
$4
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 17, 2018, 04:36:17 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/8lwybzW.jpg)

Investment
$5 - Treasure/Reaction

$2
---
During your turn, you may discard this to reveal your hand with no Action cards. If you do, +2 cards.



Edit: Changed from "On your turn" to "During your turn" - I don't believe a tiny wording change merits a spoiler tag and the old version but correct me if I'm wrong.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on September 17, 2018, 05:47:48 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/9UoouLP.jpg)

Investment
$5 - Treasure/Reaction

$2
---
On your turn, you may discard this to reveal your hand with no Action cards. If you do, +2 cards.

What would be the timing for this? Start of turn, or any time during your turn?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on September 17, 2018, 06:07:29 pm
Whetstone - Treasure Reaction, $4 cost.
Worth $3 if your deck is empty, otherwise $1.
-
When you play an Attack on your turn, you may play this from your hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 17, 2018, 06:08:43 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/9UoouLP.jpg)

Investment
$5 - Treasure/Reaction

$2
---
On your turn, you may discard this to reveal your hand with no Action cards. If you do, +2 cards.

What would be the timing for this? Start of turn, or any time during your turn?

Anytime during your turn that you have no action cards in hand.

It should probably say "During your turn" instead of "On your turn" but oh well.

Edit: It was bugging me so I changed it in the op.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MeNowDealWithIt on September 17, 2018, 07:00:57 pm
Stallion

$2
+1 buy
-
When another player plays an attack, you may first set this aside from your hand. If you do, then at the start of your next turn, +1 card and return this to your hand.

Cost: 5$
Type: Treasure - Reaction
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on September 17, 2018, 09:30:03 pm
Investment
So it's a Laboratory that can redraw itself, without needing an action to use, and once you don't need to draw any more cards it doubles as a Silver?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 17, 2018, 10:04:15 pm
Investment
So it's a Laboratory that can redraw itself, without needing an action to use, and once you don't need to draw any more cards it doubles as a Silver?

It's only a lab if you don't have any other actions in hand. In strictly BM or games where you only buy cantrips, it's a lab equivalent that can also be used as silver, yes.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on September 17, 2018, 10:26:20 pm
Now that Violet CLM's pointed out the fact that Investment is a Lab variant, it definitely seems overpowered to me.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 18, 2018, 01:15:32 am
Edit: Changed from "On your turn" to "During your turn" - I don't believe a tiny wording change merits a spoiler tag and the old version but correct me if I'm wrong.

The spoiler thing is mainly there so that discussion of the card still makes sense after changes are made.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on September 18, 2018, 04:03:46 am
Junkyard
$3 - Treasure/Reaction

Take your -1$ token. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a card costing $3 or more. Discard that card and put the rest into your hand.

When another player trashes a card, you may set this aside from your hand, to gain a copy of the trashed card. If you do, put this back in your hand at the start of your next turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on September 18, 2018, 07:38:30 am
(https://i.imgur.com/sAOQiUo.jpg)

Quote
Bribe
Cost: $5
Types: Treasure - Reaction
$2, +1 Buy
-
When another player gains a second card in their turn, you may set this aside.  If you do, gain a copy of that card, and that player gets $2 and +1 Buy.  Return this to your hand at the start of your turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ben_king on September 18, 2018, 11:44:32 am
(https://i.imgur.com/8lwybzW.jpg)

Investment
$5 - Treasure/Reaction

$2
---
During your turn, you may discard this to reveal your hand with no Action cards. If you do, +2 cards.

I like the idea of this card, but I think it can't be a reaction, since there's nothing it's reacting to.  You could say "Directly after you finish playing an Action card, you may reveal this..."

If I was going to design a card inspired by yours, I think I'd do a Storyteller variant:

Tales of Investments
$4 - Treasure/Reaction

$2
---
Directly after you finish playing an Action card, you may reveal this, setting it aside.  If you do, +2 cards and discard this at the start of your cleanup phase.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 18, 2018, 12:04:16 pm
[Investment]

I like the idea of this card, but I think it can't be a reaction, since there's nothing it's reacting to.  You could say "Directly after you finish playing an Action card, you may reveal this..."

That's not a bad suggestion, but I will point out that there are no specific rules on reactions - each one gets its own FAQ. Neither the trigger nor the FAQ for Investment seem like they would be too confusing.

The other drawback to your suggestion is that it limits functionality quite a bit. I was hoping to design a treasure that enables less reliable engines. Using your clause, if Investment is drawn in a hand of all non-actions it's just silver - that's not necessarily bad, but my idea is to give those hands a second chance to kickstart the engine.

The card you create based on this does seem incredibly overpowered though, since you removed the bit about needing to show a hand with no action cards. Your version is a $4 super lab that is just silver if you can't play an action first.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 18, 2018, 01:03:59 pm
Quicksilver, Treasure - Reaction, 2$
1$
When you play this, you may discard an Action card, for +2$.
---
At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand, to set the number of Actions you have to 2.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 18, 2018, 01:52:40 pm
Quicksilver, Treasure - Reaction, 2$
1$
When you play this, if you have more than 5 Action cards in play, +2$.
---
At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand, to set the number of Actions you have to 2.
Wouldn't At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand for +1 Action, be a simpler wording? Unless you want them to not stack.
This card is in my opinion the most interesting one, Treasures for an engine (kind of the inverse of Encampment). It is similar to Cookielord's Realm Tax (https://i.imgur.com/8tIwkjJ.png).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LastFootnote on September 18, 2018, 02:22:11 pm
Wouldn't At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand for +1 Action, be a simpler wording? Unless you want them to not stack.

No, then you could reveal the same one several times, claiming it was a different one. By the rules of Dominion, nothing stops you from revealing a Reaction card multiple times to the same event, since there's no way for other players to tell if it's the same copy or what.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ben_king on September 18, 2018, 02:26:28 pm
The card you create based on this does seem incredibly overpowered though, since you removed the bit about needing to show a hand with no action cards. Your version is a $4 super lab that is just silver if you can't play an action first.

Yeah, I could definitely see sense in having it cost $5.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on September 18, 2018, 02:34:12 pm
Ransom
$5 Treasure - Reaction

$2
---
When one of your cards is trashed, you may discard this from your hand, to gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 18, 2018, 02:59:34 pm
Ransom
$5 Treasure - Reaction

$2
---
When one of your cards is trashed, you may discard this from your hand, to gain a card costing up to $2 more than the trashed card.

I like this concept a lot. Obviously it's a great defense from certain attacks and it's amazing with trash-for benefit. It's just silver on boards with no trashing, but that's not super common. If it had the ability to trash stuff, that seems like it would make it perfect, but I don't know if that would make it too strong.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: gamesou on September 18, 2018, 04:02:11 pm
Tulip
$3 Treasure - Reaction

$4
-$1 per Treasure card you have in play (including that one).
---
When another player plays a Tulip, you may reveal this for +1 Coffers
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 18, 2018, 05:06:37 pm
Darn, I knew Quicksilver's top seemed familiar. I wanted it to be more interesting than a fixed amount, but the main catch was starting with a free Action if you have one in hand at the start of your turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LastFootnote on September 18, 2018, 05:09:12 pm
When another player plays a Tulip, you may reveal this for +1 Coffers

No, then you could reveal the same one several times, claiming it was a different one. By the rules of Dominion, nothing stops you from revealing a Reaction card multiple times to the same event, since there's no way for other players to tell if it's the same copy or what.

Maybe you should mention this thing about Reaction cards in the OP? It seems to be an oft-unknown rule.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 18, 2018, 05:10:43 pm
When another player plays a Tulip, you may reveal this for +1 Coffers

No, then you could reveal the same one several times, claiming it was a different one. By the rules of Dominion, nothing stops you from revealing a Reaction card multiple times to the same event, since there's no way for other players to tell if it's the same copy or what.

Maybe you should mention this thing about Reaction cards in the OP? It seems to be an oft-unknown rule.
You're probably right, will edit shortly
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on September 18, 2018, 06:04:08 pm
Elektron

$2
覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧覧
When another player buys a victory card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do trash this or discard a potion from your hand. Then gain a duchy or a gold to your hand.

Cost ⚗️ $2


The Greeks use to call Amber elektron. Assuming you have them both in your hand you could gain 2 duchies to your hand or 2 golds to your hand or one of each. Otherwise your just exchanging it for a gold or duchy. This may seem similar to feast. I don稚 know if it痴 any better. But it does give the potion card another use.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: grrgrrgrr on September 18, 2018, 06:29:49 pm
I know one as well. It is slightly inspired of the usual Smithy+BM thing.

Magic coin Treasure/Reaction, $5
+2$
--------------
When you play an Action, you may reveal this card, to forego its effect for +3 cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on September 18, 2018, 08:10:17 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/NACqxha.jpg)
Quote
Coffin
Types: Treasure, Reaction
Cost: $4
$2. When you play this, discard a card.
When you discard any number of cards from your hand, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash all the discarded cards.
Discard effects down to a threshold (such as Militia) occur at once: You cannot pick and choose the discarded cards that you trash or don't.
EDIT: Thank you for the catch below, LastFootnote. For some reason, I recalled reading that one does not need to show what cards they are discarding to Militia (which would imply a simultaneous discard), but the rules do not say that at all. Regardless, my comment was intended as clarification, rather than balance consideration.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LastFootnote on September 19, 2018, 12:42:37 am
(https://i.imgur.com/NACqxha.jpg)
Quote
Coffin
Types: Treasure, Reaction
Cost: $4
$2. When you play this, discard a card.
When you discard any number of cards from your hand, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash all the discarded cards.
Discard effects down to a threshold (such as Militia) occur at once: You cannot pick and choose the discarded cards that you trash or don't.

No, they don稚!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 19, 2018, 03:25:12 am
I altered the top of Quicksilver to something I didn't steal  :P

New version:

Quicksilver, Treasure - Reaction, 2$
1$
When you play this, you may discard an Action card, for +2$.
---
At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand, to set the number of Actions you have to 2.

Old version:
Quicksilver, Treasure - Reaction, 2$
1$
When you play this, if you have more than 5 Action cards in play, +2$.
---
At the start of your turn, you may reveal this from your hand, to set the number of Actions you have to 2.


Edit: I misread the rules in the OP and forgot I had to post the new version here  :-[
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on September 19, 2018, 11:35:34 am
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on September 19, 2018, 12:32:35 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)

I like this concept, but it seems a little weird that you could discard it during an opponent's turn as a reaction to an attack, but then nothing happens with that $3 since it wouldn't stick around until your turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on September 19, 2018, 07:40:20 pm
Emerald City
Treasure - Reaction - $5
Worth $2
When you play this, +2 cards.
When you draw an action card, you may discard this from your hand to play it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on September 19, 2018, 09:22:17 pm
Emerald City
Action - Treasure - $5
Worth $2
When you play this in your action phase, +2 cards.
When you draw an action card during your action phase, you may discard this from your hand to play it.
FTFY

We don't want to be playing actions in the buy phase...
Also, does it produce coin when you play it in the action phase or only when you play it in your buy phase?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on September 19, 2018, 10:41:09 pm
Whoops, I totally meant to write "Treasure - Reaction." Not sure how I screwed that up.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on September 19, 2018, 10:50:05 pm
Whoops, I totally meant to write "Treasure - Reaction." Not sure how I screwed that up.
Oh. But with two of them, it can still lead to playing actions in the buy phase unless you say "When you draw an action card during your action phase"
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 20, 2018, 05:04:01 am
My personal favourites are Ransom, Coffin and Molten Gold. They all have a unique but elegant catch.

For Molten Gold, I think the Reaction part should be tweaked a bit, as right now it's barely better (if at all) than playing it. Also it not working against attacks is sad.

I like that Coffin costs 4$ and is a Silver with a downside on play, unless you have two of them in hand. Which makes it even more meaningful that it costs 4$, as you can't open with two of them.

Ransom will be broken good with trash-for-benefit cards like Salvager, Bishop or the Remodel family. But not in a bad way. It looks fun. The name is a bit meh to me, though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on September 20, 2018, 11:24:28 am
(https://i.imgur.com/55s8i92l.png)

Edit: Changed cost from $4 to $5, effectively making this a Buy-phase Workshop in which you can immediately play Treasures, and also added $1. Hopefully this makes it a viable card for games without Attacks.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on September 20, 2018, 02:26:25 pm
My personal favorites are molten gold and scepter. I知 also surprised that scepter wasn稚 one of the cards in that antiquities thread.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 20, 2018, 03:00:37 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/mXdzX5ll.png)
The Reaction is cool but I don't think that the Silver gaining (what this will mostly be used for) is all that interesting. There is a reason Hermit sucks gaining-wise compared to Workshop variants.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on September 20, 2018, 03:43:14 pm
Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

Cheaper than what?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on September 20, 2018, 03:47:49 pm
Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

Cheaper than what?

Cheaper than the Scepter.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on September 20, 2018, 08:22:36 pm
I think my favorites are Scepter, Ransom, and Molten Gold.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on September 21, 2018, 01:37:13 am
Magnet (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Magnet&description=%242%0A-%0AWhen%20you%20buy%20a%20Copper%2C%20you%20may%20set%20this%20card%20from%20your%20discard%20pile%20aside.%20At%20the%20start%20of%20you%20next%20turn%2C%20put%20this%20into%20your%20hand.&type=Treasure%20-%20Reaction&credit=&price=%245&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F8%2F81%2FMagneticBaseSnake.jpg&color0=3&color1=2&size=0)
Type: Treasure/Reaction
Cost: $5

$2
-
When you buy a Copper, you may set this card from your discard pile aside. At the start of you next turn, put this into your hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on September 21, 2018, 03:02:59 am
Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

Cheaper than what?

Cheaper than the Scepter.

I had the same question; as worded it sounds more like it needs to be cheaper than the attack card; but it could go either way.

If the card needs to be cheaper than Scepter, then no reason to also say a non-Scepter card. If you are going to say a non-Scepter card, then probably fine to just say "costing up to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png)", and allow it to combo with cost-reducers like most gainers do.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: infangthief on September 21, 2018, 06:38:33 am
Loose Change
Treasure - Reaction - $2

$1. Gain a Loose Change.
-----------------
When you buy a Treasure, you may discard this from play to trash any number of Treasures you have in play.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on September 21, 2018, 07:07:37 am
Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

Cheaper than what?

Cheaper than the Scepter.

I had the same question; as worded it sounds more like it needs to be cheaper than the attack card; but it could go either way.

If the card needs to be cheaper than Scepter, then no reason to also say a non-Scepter card. If you are going to say a non-Scepter card, then probably fine to just say "costing up to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png)", and allow it to combo with cost-reducers like most gainers do.

So, after Tejayes' reply, I thought the intention was that the on-play is cheaper than the Scepter, but the reaction is cheaper than the Attack.  The on-play was the bit that was confusing me.  Now I'm even more confused.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ben_king on September 21, 2018, 09:17:45 am
(https://i.imgur.com/4T6LBo1m.jpg)

Centerpiece
Treasure - Reaction - $2

When you play this, it's worth $1 per Silver you have in play
--------------
When you play a Silver, you may reveal and discard this to gain a Silver to hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on September 21, 2018, 09:43:34 am
Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

Cheaper than what?

Cheaper than the Scepter.

I had the same question; as worded it sounds more like it needs to be cheaper than the attack card; but it could go either way.

If the card needs to be cheaper than Scepter, then no reason to also say a non-Scepter card. If you are going to say a non-Scepter card, then probably fine to just say "costing up to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png)", and allow it to combo with cost-reducers like most gainers do.

So, after Tejayes' reply, I thought the intention was that the on-play is cheaper than the Scepter, but the reaction is cheaper than the Attack.  The on-play was the bit that was confusing me.  Now I'm even more confused.

You are correct. On play, you gain a card cheaper than Scepter. On reaction, you gain a card cheaper than the Attack, assuming you don't gain the Attack itself.

I'll keep fiddling with the wording to make it clearer. I just wish the Card Image Generator didn't make the text so small whenever I add even a little bit more.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on September 23, 2018, 01:37:05 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)

Doesn't this need a "from your hand" clause? As written, it looks as if you could discard it from play and get a total of +5$, which is obviously too powerful.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on September 23, 2018, 06:54:03 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)

Doesn't this need a "from your hand" clause? As written, it looks as if you could discard it from play and get a total of +5$, which is obviously too powerful.

Unless otherwise specified, "discard" always means "from your hand". See, for example, Beggar.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on September 23, 2018, 07:07:55 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)

Doesn't this need a "from your hand" clause? As written, it looks as if you could discard it from play and get a total of +5$, which is obviously too powerful.

Unless otherwise specified, "discard" always means "from your hand". See, for example, Beggar.

I see. Haven't played dominion in a while, so wasn't very familiar with the specific wording.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 23, 2018, 10:27:14 pm
Judging in approximately 24 hours
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on September 26, 2018, 01:15:38 pm
Judging in approximately 24 hours

*prod*
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on September 26, 2018, 02:33:39 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/DsHrgiy.png)

All right, I think this new version is a bit better.  You can now use the reaction against attacks, and the reaction is a bit stronger, making it more worth it to try to line it up.  (if it isn't too late to edit my entry)

(https://i.imgur.com/sKfBanL.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 26, 2018, 10:29:03 pm
If I can be late on judging, you can be late on updates. Speaking of, actually finally judging this now. If anyone wants specific feedback when I'm done, feel free to shoot me a pm.

Winner: LostPhoenix's Ransom

Runner-Up: Chappy7's Molten Gold
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 27, 2018, 12:44:28 pm
Late to the game:
(https://i.imgur.com/yw9lYIQ_d.jpg?maxwidth=400&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on September 27, 2018, 03:12:23 pm
Hey, thanks!

In honor of Renaissance...

Challenge #2: Simple and Elegant
Design a card with 12 words or less on it (name, numbers, types, etc. do not count).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on September 27, 2018, 05:02:52 pm
Bond
+2 Coffers
Treasure
Cost: $5
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on September 27, 2018, 05:15:16 pm
Hey, thanks!

In honor of Renaissance...

Challenge #2: Simple and Elegant
Design a card with 12 words or less on it (name, numbers, types, etc. do not count).

Painter
Cost: $2
Types: Action/Duration

+1 Villager
At the start of your next turn: +1 Card
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 27, 2018, 05:55:36 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/OyLso9q_d.jpg?maxwidth=400&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 27, 2018, 05:58:14 pm
This is strictly better than Baker.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 27, 2018, 06:20:28 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/G3jGyel.png?maxwidth=200)
Thanks to theta for helping fix the image size
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on September 27, 2018, 06:23:55 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/G3jGyel.png?maxwidth=200)

FTFY
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 27, 2018, 06:29:15 pm
This is strictly better than Baker.

Certainly is!

Actually while I知 at it... I withdraw my first submission and tip this right into full new market for $6:
(https://i.imgur.com/bivYrOd_d.jpg?maxwidth=400&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on September 27, 2018, 06:30:51 pm
thanks theta
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on September 27, 2018, 06:54:29 pm
I think this just scrapes through at 12 words ignoring the numbers? Sorry if I can't count/misunderstood something. 12 words is really tight... it's a good challenge!
(https://i.imgur.com/KWf0l7a.png)
Quote
Wine Cellar
+2 Cards
Discard any number of Treasures, revealing them. +1 Action per Treasure discarded.
Action
Cost:$4
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 27, 2018, 07:19:41 pm
You can shave off two more words too , revealing them.  :)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on September 27, 2018, 07:32:54 pm
Moneychanger
Action - $5
+3 Coffers
Pay any number of Coffers. +1 Villager per Coffer paid.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on September 27, 2018, 07:37:05 pm
You can shave off two more words too , revealing them.  :)

No, you need to have those words there, see Shepherd. You discard the cards all at once, and your opponent can't sort through your discard pile to confirm you didn't cheat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 27, 2018, 09:57:53 pm
You can shave off two more words too , revealing them.  :)

No, you need to have those words there, see Shepherd. You discard the cards all at once, and your opponent can't sort through your discard pile to confirm you didn't cheat.

Ah makes sence
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on September 27, 2018, 11:03:04 pm
Moneychanger
Action - $5
+3 Coffers
Pay any number of Coffers. +1 Villager per Coffer paid.

Just the +3 Coffers alone is too strong for only $5. I'd say this is a $7-cost card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread #2: simple, <12 words
Post by: Aquila on September 28, 2018, 03:08:03 am
Confectioner - Action, $5 cost.
+1 Action
+ $1
Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.

(Hope subject change makes sense, in time this thread could get huge and hard to track.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on September 28, 2018, 03:37:30 am
You can shave off two more words too , revealing them.  :)

No, you need to have those words there, see Shepherd. You discard the cards all at once, and your opponent can't sort through your discard pile to confirm you didn't cheat.

Ah makes sence

Well the new Silos project just says "revealed" so I guess 1 word could be shaved off now with that wording.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on September 28, 2018, 07:56:02 am
(https://i.imgur.com/rsdAbL8.jpg)

Quote
Triptych
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Reveal separate Action, Treasure and Victory cards from your hand, for $4.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 28, 2018, 02:44:48 pm
Royalties, 5$, Treasure
$2
+1 Villager
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: mith on September 28, 2018, 03:18:43 pm
Supervisor
Type: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Villager
+$1
--------
Setup: Each player gets +1 Villager

(This seems obvious, and I'd be a little surprised if that setup doesn't appear on an actual card.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 28, 2018, 03:22:10 pm
I am pretty sure that there won't be many "Villager cantrips" as you often have to use the Villager immediately anyway.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on September 28, 2018, 04:06:16 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/mwkdB4F.png?1)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on September 29, 2018, 05:00:18 am
Challenge #2: Simple and Elegant Submission

(https://i.imgur.com/v8GeI57.jpg)

Hopefully I'm assuming correctly that "+1 Card" etcetera is considered one word. :)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gamer3000 on September 29, 2018, 09:09:04 am
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +$1

Old Version:
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 29, 2018, 09:37:29 am
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on September 29, 2018, 12:10:51 pm
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 29, 2018, 12:58:00 pm
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.

Judging from an Event I tested, which costed 2$ and gave +1 Buy, +1 Coffers, I can confirm that card-shaped things that enable you to trivially amass Coffers by skipping turns is broken, and more importantly, no fun.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on September 29, 2018, 02:09:50 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/cwVCkQGl.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on September 29, 2018, 02:31:12 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/NBPjNvT.png)
(a (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Blessed%20Chapel&description=Trash%201%20to%203%20cards%0Afrom%20your%20hand.%0A%0AIf%20you%20did%2C%20take%20Blessing.&type=Action&credit=Illustration%3A%20Abraham%20Hunter&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Finfinityfineart.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2F17-2994-post%2FChapel-Of-Hope-1024x681(pp_w940_h625).jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0)b (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Blessing&description=When%20you%20trash%20a%20card%2C%0A%2B1%20Coffers.&type=Artifact&credit=Illustration%3A%20Abraham%20Hunter&price=&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lighthousegalleries.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2Fautumnglory.jpg&color0=14&color1=0&size=1))

(Possibly cheating.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 29, 2018, 05:20:15 pm
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.
Discarding your entire hand for 4 Coffers doesn't look very impressive to me. And the notion that this enables quick Province gaining is dubious. Even if you first thinned your deck enough and bought enough Pawn Shops to be able to play one per turn you'd need 8 turns to gain 4 Provinces and nothing else (ignoring that you thus reduce the chance to play a Pawn Shop per turn).
Seems like the kind of analysis that comes to the conclusion that Silver is an overpowered card because a hand of only Silvers allows you to gain a Province. Such a hand is so strong that even after a Villain attack you can buy a Province! Crazy Silver!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: vishwathg on September 29, 2018, 05:25:02 pm
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.
Discarding your entire hand for 4 Coffers doesn't look very impressive to me. And the notion that this enables quick Province gaining is dubious. Even if you first thinned your deck enough and bought enough Pawn Shops to be able to play one per turn you'd need 8 turns to gain 4 Provinces and nothing else (ignoring that you thus reduce the chance to play a Pawn Shop per turn).
Seems like the kind of analysis that comes to the conclusion that Silver is an overpowered card because a hand of only Silvers allows you to gain a Province. Such a hand is so strong that even after a Villain attack you can buy a Province! Crazy Silver!

But you only need 1 Pawn Shop per turn, not 5 Silvers.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 29, 2018, 05:41:33 pm
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.
Discarding your entire hand for 4 Coffers doesn't look very impressive to me. And the notion that this enables quick Province gaining is dubious. Even if you first thinned your deck enough and bought enough Pawn Shops to be able to play one per turn you'd need 8 turns to gain 4 Provinces and nothing else (ignoring that you thus reduce the chance to play a Pawn Shop per turn).
Seems like the kind of analysis that comes to the conclusion that Silver is an overpowered card because a hand of only Silvers allows you to gain a Province. Such a hand is so strong that even after a Villain attack you can buy a Province! Crazy Silver!

But you only need 1 Pawn Shop per turn, not 5 Silvers.
So? You just need one Vault to always reach 6! Great cycling so far far far better than Pawn Shop! Totally crazy, now you can buy Golds and that Vault soons hits 8! You just need one or two and gaining Golds and then Provinces becomes a piece of cake!

That's partial analysis and it is highly dubious. But let's nonetheless play this game:


Let's assume that you have to buy 5 Pawn Shops to consistently use them and that you play them 8 times for 32 Coin tokens and buy 4 Provinces (now your deck has 19 cards). So 13 moves to get half the Provinces is probably a bit too quick. But if you add 2 bad turns in which you draw no Pawn Shop we are already up to 15. Still better than Big Money though so perhaps a bit too good.

Add any attack, handsize, junking or whatever, and that entire thing becomes more complicated. With handsize attacks Pawn Shop fails and with junking attacks you need trashers or more Pawn Shops. If there is a quick engine it also fails.

So yeah, perhaps too good, perhaps not. Has to be tested to be definitely determined.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 30, 2018, 12:58:47 am
(https://i.imgur.com/NBPjNvT.png)
(a (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Blessed%20Chapel&description=Trash%201%20to%203%20cards%0Afrom%20your%20hand.%0A%0AIf%20you%20did%2C%20take%20Blessing.&type=Action&credit=Illustration%3A%20Abraham%20Hunter&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Finfinityfineart.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F04%2F17-2994-post%2FChapel-Of-Hope-1024x681(pp_w940_h625).jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0)b (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Blessing&description=When%20you%20trash%20a%20card%2C%0A%2B1%20Coffers.&type=Artifact&credit=Illustration%3A%20Abraham%20Hunter&price=&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lighthousegalleries.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2015%2F04%2Fautumnglory.jpg&color0=14&color1=0&size=1))

(Possibly cheating.)

I feel like this should be 2 still maybe 3.  Like chapel, most people will just buy one, the artifact wont enter your posession until after your first chapel and it seems the chance of that being passed along before payout is high.  Even at 2 chapel still shows almost equal strength since you limit trashing to 3.

I like this very much though!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on September 30, 2018, 02:27:30 am
(https://i.imgur.com/5s5UPS6.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 30, 2018, 05:42:24 am
Pawn Shop
Type: Action
Cost: $2
Discard any number of cards. For each card discarded, +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
I like this a lot. It is better than Secret Chamber (if you ignore its Reaction part) but that removed card was pretty weak so that's not an issue.
So much better that I'm pretty sure this is broken. If you get +4 Coffers every time you'll end up getting Provinces way too fast.
Discarding your entire hand for 4 Coffers doesn't look very impressive to me. And the notion that this enables quick Province gaining is dubious. Even if you first thinned your deck enough and bought enough Pawn Shops to be able to play one per turn you'd need 8 turns to gain 4 Provinces and nothing else (ignoring that you thus reduce the chance to play a Pawn Shop per turn).

You are not ignoring anything here because there is nothing to ignore. The strangth of Coffers lies, among other things, with the fact that you can ammass them over several turns, and spend them later. You don't have to buy a Province as soon as you have enough tokens. That's the first part of your reasoning that's wrong.

The second part is, you don't need 8 tokend to buy a Province. You might need 4. Or 3 even. Maybe 5 if you are unlucky or late game, but that's it. On average, every skipped turn becomes a Province later.

But you don't need to trust someone who tested a very similar premise. Trust your hyperbolical Silver comparisons.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 30, 2018, 05:45:10 am
(https://i.imgur.com/5s5UPS6.jpg)

This is awesome. I was really surprised when Nocturne didn't have any cards that make use of your unspent coins, and this has a cute catch. Just not sure whether it should spend those Actions/Coins...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 08:12:27 am
The second part is, you don't need 8 tokend to buy a Province. You might need 4. Or 3 even. Maybe 5 if you are unlucky or late game, but that's it. On average, every skipped turn becomes a Province later.
You still need two turns. One turn in which you produce the 4 Coffers, another turn in which you play 4 Coppers or whatever. A Province every second turn after some build-up is good but not game breaking. I'd test the card at $4 or $5. At $5 I'd consider making it non-terminal although that might be redundant due to the ability to gainer Villagers via it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 30, 2018, 08:13:44 am
The second part is, you don't need 8 tokend to buy a Province. You might need 4. Or 3 even. Maybe 5 if you are unlucky or late game, but that's it. On average, every skipped turn becomes a Province later.
You still need two turns. One turn in which you produce the 4 Coffers, another turn in which you play 4 Coppers or whatever. A Province every second turn is good but not game breaking. I'd test the card at $5.

It doesn't have to be game breaking if it's both dull and strong. Big money isn't game breaking, nonetheless it often being a strong and easy strategy was the biggest flaw of base. Arguably, Chapel is more broken than Rebuild, but unlike Rebuild, it isn't dull. That's the main problem here.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 08:15:53 am
(https://i.imgur.com/5s5UPS6.jpg)
Ignoring the circle of converting previously gained Villagers into Actions and then into Coffers I guess that the latter option is  more important. I'd also test the card at $4. While Recruiter is extremly strong and shouldn't be a benchmark this seems nonetheless weaker than it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 08:19:27 am
The second part is, you don't need 8 tokend to buy a Province. You might need 4. Or 3 even. Maybe 5 if you are unlucky or late game, but that's it. On average, every skipped turn becomes a Province later.
You still need two turns. One turn in which you produce the 4 Coffers, another turn in which you play 4 Coppers or whatever. A Province every second turn is good but not game breaking. I'd test the card at $5.

It doesn't have to be game breaking if it's both dull and strong. Big money isn't game breaking, nonetheless it often being a strong and easy strategy was the biggest flaw of base. Arguably, Chapel is more broken than Rebuild, but unlike Rebuild, it isn't dull. That's the main problem here.
I fail to see why this card is supposed to be dull (not that such subjective issues are relevant in the first place; somebody might view BM as dull or a hyperthin Chapel deck as dull). Discard for benefit always competes with sifters and trashers and this is in no way a no-brainer if is priced correctly (as I wrote in my last post, I was totally wrong about the balance, this has to cost $4 or $5).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 30, 2018, 08:21:03 am
(https://i.imgur.com/5s5UPS6.jpg)
Ignoring the circle of converting previously gained Villagers into Actions and then into Coffers I guess that the latter option is  more important.

You can't use Villagers outside your Action phase, so there is no circle.

The second part is, you don't need 8 tokend to buy a Province. You might need 4. Or 3 even. Maybe 5 if you are unlucky or late game, but that's it. On average, every skipped turn becomes a Province later.
You still need two turns. One turn in which you produce the 4 Coffers, another turn in which you play 4 Coppers or whatever. A Province every second turn is good but not game breaking. I'd test the card at $5.

It doesn't have to be game breaking if it's both dull and strong. Big money isn't game breaking, nonetheless it often being a strong and easy strategy was the biggest flaw of base. Arguably, Chapel is more broken than Rebuild, but unlike Rebuild, it isn't dull. That's the main problem here.
I fail to see why this card is supposed to be dull. Discard for benefit always competes with sifters and trashers and this is in no way a no-brainer if is priced correctly (as I wrote in my last post, I was totally wrong about the balance, this has to cost $4 or $5).

As usual, you insist to disagree, and that's fine with me. I feel I have sufficiently supported my point for others to draw their own conclusions.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 08:23:42 am
You can't use Villagers outside your Action phase, so there is no circle.
Circle like in Transmure-esque circle.
Previously, like in Backstreet played previously, on a previous turn.
T1: Coins -> Villagers | T2:  Villagers -> Actions -> Coffers

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on September 30, 2018, 08:26:09 am
You can't use Villagers outside your Action phase, so there is no circle.
I wrote previously, like in Backstreet playd previously, on a previous turn.
T1: Coins -> Villagers | T2:  Villagers -> Actions -> Coffers

That's true, of course.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 08:29:25 am
Challenge #2: Simple and Elegant Submission

(https://i.imgur.com/v8GeI57.jpg)

Hopefully I'm assuming correctly that "+1 Card" etcetera is considered one word. :)
I like it a lot but think that it is a tiny bit too good (of course it cannot cost $7 like the DoublePeddler tested during Prosperity, it is a bit weaker so $6 is the right price)
You can end up with extra Actions in a draw engine but I don't think that it is hard to pull off playing this while only having 1 Action.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 30, 2018, 01:35:58 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/5s5UPS6.jpg)

I like this, and although actions to coffers and coin to villagers is novel I think coin to coffers feels cleaner in concept to me but to each their own!  Great card
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Umadin on September 30, 2018, 02:11:45 pm
Challenge #2: Simple and Elegant Submission

(https://i.imgur.com/v8GeI57.jpg)

Hopefully I'm assuming correctly that "+1 Card" etcetera is considered one word. :)
I like it a lot but think that it is a tiny bit too good (of course it cannot cost $7 like the DoublePeddler tested during Prosperity, it is a bit weaker so $6 is the right price)
You can end up with extra Actions in a draw engine but I don't think that it is hard to pull off playing this while only having 1 Action.

I think its priced fine if its not as good as bank, kings court, expand, forge, its less then 7.  This doesn稚 seem overpriced in the least, I壇 even say its a low valued 6 / high value 5. Compare to mill, bazaar, treasury, hughway, bazaar.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on September 30, 2018, 03:09:28 pm
As I already mentioned, the cost is right. The problem is that I fear, perhaps wrongly, that it is too easy to consistenly make Pioneer work. Compare this to the the only two official DoublePeddler versions, Conspirator and Grand Market:
Conspirator always implies the risk of being a terminal Silver, the downside is that you need to set up an engine before you can make Conspirator work as payload.
Grand Market is even harder, it has an additional extra Buy but you need to do a lot before you can gain it.

Pioneer on the other hand is a card that you can simply buy when you first hit $6 and unless you already have a lot of Villages in your deck chances are high that it will work without any further ado. You can e.g. play BM and use this instead of Gold with zero risk of failing.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on September 30, 2018, 03:35:11 pm
As I already mentioned, the cost is right. The problem is that I fear, perhaps wrongly, that it is too easy to consistenly make Pioneer work. Compare this to the the only two official DoublePeddler versions, Conspirator and Grand Market:
Conspirator always implies the risk of being a terminal Silver, the downside is that you need to set up an engine before you can make Conspirator work as payload.
Grand Market is even harder, it has an additional extra Buy but you need to do a lot before you can gain it.

Pioneer on the other hand is a card that you can simply buy when you first hit $6 and unless you already have a lot of Villages in your deck chances are high that it will work without any further ado. You can e.g. play BM and use this instead of Gold with zero risk of failing.

I have the same concerns. I think this works too well in too many situations. The only downside is this clashes with villages (or spliters), but as most of those are cantrips, the risk here is often nominal. If every Pioneer played as "+1 Card, +1 Action, +$2" then cost $6 is a steal, but any amount of "+1 Card" plays are going to drop it's overall value. I just have no idea at what point this has an overall value of cost $5, $4, etcetera.

A lot of unanswered questions with this one! I would like to try and tweak it a bit, but outside the realm of this 12-word restricted competition. 

A possible change is to make it less likely to hit by making it cost $5 and a conditional Gold. Probably a bit more boring, but this way you have to rely more on Villages for draw (if you have them).

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on September 30, 2018, 05:53:09 pm
Royalties, 5$, Treasure
$2
+1 Villager
I think this one's my favorite. Both simple and interesting which was kind of the goal of this mini-contest. It's one that could easily turn out to be in Renaissance.

The power of Backstreet and Pioneer vary greatly depending on how many +actions are in the kingdom, but Pioneer seems a lot more controllable. I don't really like the idea of converting actions to coins anyway (which both of those do, in effect). There's a reason diadem didn't work as a kingdom card.
Also, Worker's Village.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 01, 2018, 12:38:35 am
Challenge #2 - Simple and Elegant Submission

This was going to be my original submission and after some thought I'm going to go back to this. Sorry for the switch! I'm going to remove the image of Pioneer so there is no confusion.

(https://i.imgur.com/CtI81bD.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 01, 2018, 01:46:17 am
Challenge #2 - Simple and Elegant Submission

This was going to be my original submission and after some thought I'm going to go back to this. Sorry for the switch! I'm going to remove the image of Pioneer so there is no confusion.

(https://i.imgur.com/CtI81bD.jpg)
It's a paradoxical card. When it has its extra effect then you have actions after playing it, so it's extra effect doesn't happen and then you don't have actions left so its extra effect happens which causes it extra effect to not happen...
("If you would have no actions after playing this." should do what you want.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 01, 2018, 03:11:19 am
The power of Backstreet and Pioneer vary greatly depending on how many +actions are in the kingdom, but Pioneer seems a lot more controllable. I don't really like the idea of converting actions to coins anyway (which both of those do, in effect). There's a reason diadem didn't work as a kingdom card.
Also, Worker's Village.
Well, the cashing in of Backstreet is delayed, you can't use the tokens the turn you get them. Is that enough to make it work? I don't know what you think the reason is that Diadem didn't work as a kingdom card, so that is hard to address. Of course if you don't like the concept there is not much I can do about that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: infangthief on October 01, 2018, 06:15:43 am
Challenge #2 - Simple and Elegant Submission

This was going to be my original submission and after some thought I'm going to go back to this. Sorry for the switch! I'm going to remove the image of Pioneer so there is no confusion.

(https://i.imgur.com/CtI81bD.jpg)
It's a paradoxical card. When it has its extra effect then you have actions after playing it, so it's extra effect doesn't happen and then you don't have actions left so its extra effect happens which causes it extra effect to not happen...
("If you would have no actions after playing this." should do what you want.)
A simpler solution would just be to remove the bit in brackets completely:

+1 Card. If you have no Actions: +1 Card and +2 Actions.

That works if you're being precise about when exactly your Action count gets updated.
It also works from a common sense perspective. I mean, what else could it reasonably mean?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 01, 2018, 06:45:25 am
You are totally right, to prevent the paradox that LibraryAdventurer mentioned the future time referrence just has to be deleted.

About the actual card, I like it a lot (nothing surprising with Kudasai's designs). If you play two Sunken Cities their net effect is that of Laboratory. That sucks but I think this happens less often that pullung of a to and fro between Sunken City and a terminal.
I also like that it is different from Shanty Town and Cursed Village in terms of what happens when the card "misfires". Drawing a card is probably often better than being a Necropolis. On the other hand, it could warrant further village support which decreases the strength of Sunken City.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 01, 2018, 11:44:55 pm
I can see the confusion with the text "(after playing this)" As I think you all already know, this was meant to help clear up any confusion about Actions being used when an Action is first played and not upon its resolution, but it does a poor job getting that point across. You all seem to think it's not needed, so that's good enough with me for removing it! Thanks for the heads up.

I should however argue that I think the phrasing is fine. I only bring this up, because at some point I might make a card that cares if you have Actions left and has a check for that at some point in the cards instructions. For instance: +$2, If you have Actions (after playing this), some effect. Here I think the "(after playing this)" is much more helpful in relaying the check happens mid-way into playing the card (i.e. after using an Action to play the card).

I'm basing this off the notion that playing an Action has three phases: (1) Play the Action, (2) Following the Actions instructions, and (3) Resolve the Action. Of course the rules don't quite phrase it this way, so I admit I could be wrong here. Would love to hear more from you all! Does my argument make sense? No sense at all!?

At any rate, here is the changed version (v0.2) of Sunken City. Thanks for enduring my rant.

(https://i.imgur.com/nhGQA3D.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 02, 2018, 03:21:43 am
I think you are right. The rulebooks are not totally clear about this but they do distinguish between playing and resolving Actions, e.g.:

To play an Action, the player takes an Action card from his hand and lays it face-up in his play area.
[...]
Furthermore, the player must fully resolve an Action card before playing another one

And of course the wording of 1st edition Coin of the Realm:

Directly after resolving an Action, you may call this, for +2 Actions.

Also, some clarifying text on cards is definitely always helpful. Tragic Hero also says after drawing even though it is not technically necessary.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 02, 2018, 04:46:20 am
From Adventures' second edition, it's pretty clear that a card is being played until you are done resolving it. So the first version of Sunken City wouldn't work. I'd suggest just using something like "If you have no Actions now".

Personally, I feel the difference between powered-up and default play is too extreme for a 5$. Just always give it the +2 Cards.
This would also be prettier in that it now perfectly mirrors Shanty Town. Also it reduces the word count.

I'd actually think about a name that references Shanty Town in that respect (although admittedly, I also have a card called Sunken City, so I might be biased).

Eg:
Suburbs, Action, 5$
+2 Cards
If you have no Actions now, +2 Actions.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 03, 2018, 03:57:49 am
From Adventures' second edition, it's pretty clear that a card is being played until you are done resolving it. So the first version of Sunken City wouldn't work. I'd suggest just using something like "If you have no Actions now".

Personally, I feel the difference between powered-up and default play is too extreme for a 5$. Just always give it the +2 Cards.
This would also be prettier in that it now perfectly mirrors Shanty Town. Also it reduces the word count.

I'd actually think about a name that references Shanty Town in that respect (although admittedly, I also have a card called Sunken City, so I might be biased).

Eg:
Suburbs, Action, 5$
+2 Cards
If you have no Actions now, +2 Actions.

I agree with all your points. Sunken City never really made sense; I merely wanted an excuse to use that great artwork! If you want it for your Sunken City just let me know. Anyways, here is the latest (and last) change:

(https://i.imgur.com/qtHuPSz.jpg)

You can't get any further from a Shanty Town than a Resort. Kind of fits the theme of the card as well. Often it is rest and relaxation one needs in order to be truly productive.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 03, 2018, 04:23:45 am
Thanks, but too many of my cards have a shade of blue already  :P

Needless to say, the new art is also really pretty.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 03, 2018, 04:28:41 pm
And now it seems clear that an unconditional +2 Cards on Resort is too strong. It is now essentially a Laboratory if you chain them and can provide +2 Actions at times. So I won't be changing it back since I've changed this enough already, but I just wanted to acknowledge I'm aware this is too strong and will change it after the competition.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 04, 2018, 05:34:12 am
I'd stick with the previous version. It looks less elegant but it is mechanically more sound as the net effect of 2 Resorts being played subsequently equals that of 1, not 2 Laboratories like with the new version.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 04, 2018, 06:12:34 am
And now it seems clear that an unconditional +2 Cards on Resort is too strong. It is now essentially a Laboratory if you chain them and can provide +2 Actions at times. So I won't be changing it back since I've changed this enough already, but I just wanted to acknowledge I'm aware this is too strong and will change it after the competition.

You can always price it higher. But anyhow, your deck is going to contain other cards, too, so I think you shouldn't just assume you'll always be able to chain them directly. Especially if you get other Villages (which you should, because 5$ is still a high price point to get all your Actions from there) it becomes more tricky. At the very least, unlike Lab, this imposes a limitation on how useful other Villages are to you. I think that's a fair tradeoff. +1 Card is just such a god-awful effect for a card costing 5$... Also, it's not like Hunting Party cares too much for Lab's feelings.

Here's another idea, anyhow:

If you have no Actions now, +2 Cards, +2 Actions
Otherwise, +1 Card, +1 Action
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on October 04, 2018, 08:14:44 am
Will judge in a few hours.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 04, 2018, 11:12:25 am
Especially if you get other Villages (which you should, because 5$ is still a high price point to get all your Actions from there) it becomes more tricky. At the very least, unlike Lab, this imposes a limitation on how useful other Villages are to you. I think that's a fair tradeoff. +1 Card is just such a god-awful effect for a card costing 5$.
So far we have: 2 Resorts is 2 Labs. Perfectly balanced. Or to generalize, with n being even: n Resports equals n Labs; n+1 Resorts equals n Labs plus 1 Lost City. Only upsides and no downsides.

But let's take a look at what happens in other bad cases with Village thrown into the mix.

Village plus Resort is a Lab. Bad.
Village plus 2 Resorts is Village plus 2 Labs. Perfectly balanced.

So I think that this very simple worst case scenario analysis suffices to note that the +2 Cards version is too good. You are totally right that +1 Card feels artifical and weird but that's just how it feels. Mechanically soundness is more important than feeling weird because it is novel or whatever.
And about "extremes", if we take a look at similar cards like Cursed Village or Shanty Town (this will also play very similarly, you want to play first Resort and then your terminal with Resort having the advantage over the other two cards that you can actually use it well for a draw engine) there are at worst a Necropolis. Not necessarily that much better than a Ruined Library.

Quote
Here's another idea, anyhow:

If you have no Actions now, +2 Cards, +2 Actions
Otherwise, +1 Card, +1 Action
This would be interesting if Herald did not exist.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 04, 2018, 12:41:50 pm
Hi everyone, this is my first time posting on the forum.

Haunted Mansion
$6
Action-Victory-Doom
Receive the next two Hexes. Gain a Ghost to your hand.
_____________________________________________
1VP

I have a card image, but can't figure out how to post it... Could someone tell me how to do it? Here's the link anyway.
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Haunted%20Mansion&description=Receive%20the%20next%20two%20Hexes.%20Gain%20a%20Ghost%20to%20your%20hand.%0A-%0A1%25&type=Action-Victory-Doom&credit=&price=%246&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.churchofhalloween.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fhaunted-houses%2Fhaunted-house-tim-warnock.png&color0=2&color1=1&size=0 (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Haunted%20Mansion&description=Receive%20the%20next%20two%20Hexes.%20Gain%20a%20Ghost%20to%20your%20hand.%0A-%0A1%25&type=Action-Victory-Doom&credit=&price=%246&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.churchofhalloween.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fhaunted-houses%2Fhaunted-house-tim-warnock.png&color0=2&color1=1&size=0)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 04, 2018, 02:08:32 pm
Welcome to the forum.
I like your card. Ghost would probably OKish at a price around $7 and this gains the Ghost to hand but also shoots you thrice in the foot (in the the presence of Ghost that self-junking will hurt a bit less) so it is probably roughly balanced. If it is too good I'd just cut the hand-gaining.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 04, 2018, 02:13:40 pm
Thanks. I've been obssessed with Ghost since Nocturne came out and have been trying to come up with ways of gaining them besides Exorcist and Cemetery. Haven't playtested it yet, though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 04, 2018, 02:14:30 pm
Hi everyone, this is my first time posting on the forum.

Haunted Mansion
$6
Action-Victory-Doom
Receive the next two Hexes. Gain a Ghost to your hand.
_____________________________________________
1VP

I have a card image, but can't figure out how to post it... Could someone tell me how to do it? Here's the link anyway.
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Haunted%20Mansion&description=Receive%20the%20next%20two%20Hexes.%20Gain%20a%20Ghost%20to%20your%20hand.%0A-%0A1%25&type=Action-Victory-Doom&credit=&price=%246&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.churchofhalloween.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fhaunted-houses%2Fhaunted-house-tim-warnock.png&color0=2&color1=1&size=0 (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Haunted%20Mansion&description=Receive%20the%20next%20two%20Hexes.%20Gain%20a%20Ghost%20to%20your%20hand.%0A-%0A1%25&type=Action-Victory-Doom&credit=&price=%246&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.churchofhalloween.com%2Fwp-content%2Fgallery%2Fhaunted-houses%2Fhaunted-house-tim-warnock.png&color0=2&color1=1&size=0)

You need to find an image hosting website to put your photo on. Then it should provide you a link in BBCode. Copy that link and paste it into your forum post.

I use www.imgur.com. It requires you to create an account, but it is worth the small effort.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 04, 2018, 02:31:51 pm
I can't seem to get it to work. How do I put it into a post?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LostPhoenix on October 04, 2018, 02:58:00 pm
Solid submissions, everyone. I feel like the student critiquing the teacher. This was difficult to decide.

Winner: Backstreet by faust.

Runner up: Secluded Village by Doom_Shark.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 04, 2018, 07:12:26 pm
I just realized that my card did not actually conform to the requirements. It should say 'Gain a Ghost from its pile, so it would be more than 12 words.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 05, 2018, 01:48:40 am
Solid submissions, everyone. I feel like the student critiquing the teacher. This was difficult to decide.

Winner: Backstreet by faust.
Thanks!

New challenge: Create a Reserve with a call trigger that is distinct from any existing one.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread #3: reserve with unique call trigger
Post by: Aquila on October 05, 2018, 05:31:43 am
Diarist - Action Reserve, $3 cost.
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you shuffle, you may call this, to pick one of the cards and set it aside face down. Put it into your hand at the start of your next turn, then discard this.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 05, 2018, 11:40:57 am
(https://i.imgur.com/UEdYxXF.png)

I couldn't figure out how to make the image fit, so her head it cut off.  But you get the idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on October 05, 2018, 12:29:23 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/UEdYxXF.png)

I couldn't figure out how to make the image fit, so her head it cut off.  But you get the idea.

Isn't this pretty much Moneylender but better?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 05, 2018, 12:30:15 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/6GxkkYj.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 12:37:32 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/6GxkkYj.png)
I like how it is your last 'resort' to be able to play more actions.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 05, 2018, 01:26:23 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/6GxkkYj.png)
You could argue that this design space is already covered by CotR as the call part literally does the same thing (you never call CotR unless you need the Actions unless there is something funky going on like Horn of Plenty) but I think that it is just superficial comminality and that the card is  unique enough.
If Renaissance has a $4 village that yields two Villagers it would become retroactively obsolete as it is strictly weaker but I seriously doubt that even a cantrip that yields one Villagers will be in Renaissance.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 05, 2018, 01:57:34 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/UEdYxXF.png)

I couldn't figure out how to make the image fit, so her head it cut off.  But you get the idea.

Isn't this pretty much Moneylender but better?
True....I guess it is quite similar.  Although the whole reserve nature means it can miss shuffles and all that, so IDK if it is strictly better.  I'll think about it and see if I want to tweak it. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 05, 2018, 02:05:27 pm
True....I guess it is quite similar.  Although the whole reserve nature means it can miss shuffles and all that, so IDK if it is strictly better.  I'll think about it and see if I want to tweak it.
It is strictly better as you can call it in the same turn in which you played it (ignoring funky stuff like Storyteller and Black Market).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 05, 2018, 02:15:24 pm
True....I guess it is quite similar.  Although the whole reserve nature means it can miss shuffles and all that, so IDK if it is strictly better.  I'll think about it and see if I want to tweak it.
It is strictly better as you can call it in the same turn in which you played it (ignoring funky stuff like Storyteller and Black Market).
How about

'When you play your second Copper this turn, you may call this to trash that Copper."
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ben_king on October 05, 2018, 02:31:44 pm
Vanishing City
Action - Reserve - $3

+2 Cards
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-----
When you play a Vanishing City, you may call this, for +1 Action.


(https://i.imgur.com/7HzpypYm.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 02:53:46 pm
Vanishing City
Action - Reserve - $3

+2 Cards
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-----
When you play a Vanishing City, you may call this, for +1 Action.


(https://i.imgur.com/7HzpypYm.jpg)
Interesting. I really like this card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 05, 2018, 02:53:49 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 03:12:30 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)
I like it, but that seems strong. Maybe put a price range on what it can gain and/or make it +2 Coffers? Also maybe it should be worded 'the player to your left gets +1 Coffers,' maybe not. I don't know if there's any cards to base that off of.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on October 05, 2018, 03:18:36 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)

I don't even want to think about how this interacts with Possession.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on October 05, 2018, 04:10:44 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)
This makes things miserable for the player to your left, as they're not allowed to buy a good card. No amount of Coffers is going to take this bitterness away, and no amount of debt to you is going to soften the intent of stealing their card. And if everyone goes for these... it's a very degenerate game. Reserve Smugglers maybe, but not this imo. Still, you probably realise all of this and it wasn't the main issue I had.
I looked at the Adventures rulebook thinking about how calling this on the player to your left's turn would work. It says called cards are 'normally' discarded at your Clean-up, so I suppose this could sit in play until your next turn's Clean-up? Would that be generally self-intuitive? Of course discarding from the Tavern mat to trigger isn't calling it so doesn't meet the contest brief.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 05, 2018, 04:15:23 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)
This makes things miserable for the player to your left, as they're not allowed to buy a good card. No amount of Coffers is going to take this bitterness away, and no amount of debt to you is going to soften the intent of stealing their card. And if everyone goes for these... it's a very degenerate game. Reserve Smugglers maybe, but not this imo. Still, you probably realise all of this and it wasn't the main issue I had.
I looked at the Adventures rulebook thinking about how calling this on the player to your left's turn would work. It says called cards are 'normally' discarded at your Clean-up, so I suppose this could sit in play until your next turn's Clean-up? Would that be generally self-intuitive? Of course discarding from the Tavern mat to trigger isn't calling it so doesn't meet the contest brief.

Agreed.  What good are Coffers if you still don't want to spend them on anything?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 04:16:28 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/xfWQAo5.jpg)       (https://i.imgur.com/WkjCG9w.jpg)

Edit: Just to be clear, if you play Winery and don't have Wine, you take Wine and do not get the +3 Villagers or +3 Coffers.
Edit: Fixed Wine to say Winery.
Edit: Changed both images and renamed Brewery to Winery.
Old versions:
$4 Brewery
Action
If you don't have Wine, take it. Put this on your Tavern mat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
When another player takes Wine from you, you may call this from your Tavern mat for +1 Coffers

Wine
Artifact
When you play a Brewery, +2$ and +1 Buy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 05, 2018, 04:22:20 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/cPwzA1H.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/pf1cgvA.jpg)

If my opponent bought this, I'd never buy one.  They'd have to buy one, play it, and buy another just to get a Woodcutter effect for each play.  Woodcutter wasn't even good enough at $3 let alone $4. 

I do like the Project kind of feel with Wine and the idea of getting a benefit when it is stolen.

Oh and it seems odd that if your opponent ignores Brewery all of your Breweries are one-shot cards.  Wine needs to be good enough to almost guarantee a tug of war.
I might buy it if Wine said +$3 and +1 Buy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 05, 2018, 04:25:27 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/oyB5UbL.jpg)
This makes things miserable for the player to your left, as they're not allowed to buy a good card. No amount of Coffers is going to take this bitterness away, and no amount of debt to you is going to soften the intent of stealing their card. And if everyone goes for these... it's a very degenerate game. Reserve Smugglers maybe, but not this imo. Still, you probably realise all of this and it wasn't the main issue I had.
I looked at the Adventures rulebook thinking about how calling this on the player to your left's turn would work. It says called cards are 'normally' discarded at your Clean-up, so I suppose this could sit in play until your next turn's Clean-up? Would that be generally self-intuitive? Of course discarding from the Tavern mat to trigger isn't calling it so doesn't meet the contest brief.

There are official ways to cause cards to be cleaned up on your opponent's turns actually. Call Coin of the Realm (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Coin_of_the_Realm) after playing Caravan Guard (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Caravan_Guard) as a reaction to an attack. The official rule is that the Reserve cards are cleaned up the turn they are called; so it won't wait until your next turn.

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18532.msg754212#msg754212
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 05, 2018, 04:32:01 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/cPwzA1H.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/pf1cgvA.jpg)

It's not immediately clear if you should get the Wine benefit the first time you play Brewery. Some would think that by the time you take the Wine, it's too late, you've passed "when you play a Brewery". Except we do know that "when" effects actually happen after the event is done (except when things say "first"). Meaning you that playing a Brewery would always give you the wine bonus... which actually makes having the bonus on the artifact meaningless/arbitrary. It seems like that bonus could be on the action, while the "when an opponent takes" could be on the artifact.

Also, no reason to have "if you don't have Wine". Other artifact-takers don't. Unless your intent was that the "put this on your tavern mat" was also meant to be part of the condition, in which case you need to fix the wording.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 04:36:47 pm
Thank you Chappy7 and GendoIkari. Updated version above. Maybe it should cost 5 now... And my intention is that you do not get the Wine bonus from the first Brewery.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 05, 2018, 04:40:42 pm
This makes things miserable for the player to your left, as they're not allowed to buy a good card. No amount of Coffers is going to take this bitterness away, and no amount of debt to you is going to soften the intent of stealing their card. And if everyone goes for these... it's a very degenerate game. Reserve Smugglers maybe, but not this imo. Still, you probably realise all of this and it wasn't the main issue I had.
I looked at the Adventures rulebook thinking about how calling this on the player to your left's turn would work. It says called cards are 'normally' discarded at your Clean-up, so I suppose this could sit in play until your next turn's Clean-up? Would that be generally self-intuitive? Of course discarding from the Tavern mat to trigger isn't calling it so doesn't meet the contest brief.
I don't think that sitting in front of you until the next Clean-up is an issue at all.

The card stealing is supposed to be nasty (and the card might be totally bonkers) but I don't think that this is necessarily game breaking, it is something like two Rogue attacks in a row and the gaining player has control over what he gains. If the presence of the card makes the game degenerate into Silver buying this looks boring at first sight but if this is the best stratey the player with Barmaid might lose. With +2 Coffers a money strategy looks like an even better counter.  So technically speaking the question is which equilibria might arise due to Barmaid: no Barmaid at all, just Silver gaining without Barmaid calling or ordinary play with everybody going for some Barmaids?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 04:41:59 pm
Should I just make Wine a token or something and say, "If you don't have the Wine token, take it and put this on your Tavern mat. Otherwise +3 Coffers and +3 Villagers." They mean the same thing, I think.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 04:44:13 pm
Is there anyway to make Moat etc. work against Barmaid? That would go a long way in my opinion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 05, 2018, 04:53:24 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/ApE0TUO.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/1XPDwDZ.jpg)
A wording hint: "you may call this [from your Tavernt mat] for" suffices, you don't need the stuff in the []. I also wouldn't implement this via a token, it is smaller than a card and the Artifact wandering around the table is much clearer to notice during the game.

I think this is the most creative idea so far among the Reserve cards and it shows what great things you can do with Artifacts beyond the hypersimple Renaissance stuff.

Is there anyway to make Moat etc. work against Barmaid? That would go a long way in my opinion.
Barmaid cannot have an Attack type as the actual attack can happen anytime, it doesn't happen right now or next turn like with Duration-Attacks so Moat being played would be impossible to track. Also, flavour-wise the idea is that the opponent gets softly lured into your Tavern and not bluntly crushed by a Knight or whatever.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 04:55:33 pm
Thanks, changed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 05, 2018, 05:50:26 pm
It would be nice to keep the winners, and possibly even all the entries, catalogued in the OP @Doomshark.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 05, 2018, 06:04:04 pm
(https://sites.google.com/site/dajangbandwebsite/my-pathfinder-setting-stuff/character-classes/CoffeeShop.png?attredirects=0)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 06:17:25 pm
(https://sites.google.com/site/dajangbandwebsite/my-pathfinder-setting-stuff/character-classes/CoffeeShop.png?attredirects=0)

Just wanted you to know if there's supposed to be a card image or something here, there isn't anything (at least nothing shows up for me).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 05, 2018, 07:54:47 pm
Native Guide - $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern Mat.
When you would draw a card, you may first call this, to look at the top 3 cards of your deck, discard 1 and put the others back in any order.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 05, 2018, 08:18:00 pm
Native Guide - $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern Mat.
When you would draw a card, you may first call this, to look at the top 3 cards of your deck, discard 1 and put the others back in any order.

Neat card. You might want to word it like this: When you would draw a card, you may instead call this, to look at the top 3 cards of your deck, discard 1 and put 1 in your hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 05, 2018, 08:25:26 pm
edit: Modded my card so it isn't so weak.

Quote
Coffee Shop
$3 Action-Reserve
+1 Action.
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.

old version:
Quote
Coffee Shop
$4 Action-Reserve
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.
[/spoiler]
...how do you use spoiler tags anyway?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 05, 2018, 08:31:29 pm
Vanishing City
Action - Reserve - $3

+2 Cards
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-----
When you play a Vanishing City, you may call this, for +1 Action.


(https://i.imgur.com/7HzpypY.jpg)

I was working on a card quite similar to this:

Quote
(https://i.imgur.com/6APu9ttl.jpg)

Researcher
Action-Reserve - $5

+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you play a Researcher, you may call this for +3 Cards.

But since you beat me, I'll officially submit this one instead:

(https://i.imgur.com/olThrsFl.png)

Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.

===

Any feedback is appreciated.

Edit 1: Reworded the call effect per ThetaSigma12's suggestion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 05, 2018, 09:00:12 pm
Smokehouse should be:
Quote
...you may call this for +1 Coffers per (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) that card costs.
See Recruiter. It's more clear in general and helps clarify for (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png) and (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7a/Potion.png/9px-Potion.png) costs.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 05, 2018, 09:14:49 pm
Reservist - $5 Action Reserve
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you gain a card, you may call this, to put that card on your Tavern mat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: vishwathg on October 06, 2018, 01:02:49 am
Reservist - $5 Action Reserve
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you gain a card, you may call this, to put that card on your Tavern mat.

And what do they do there? Just sit there, like Coppers from Miser? Oh, it combos with Miser too.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 06, 2018, 01:11:15 am
Unless they're Reserve cards themselves, yes, going by Miser's precedent they would just sit there. Which is nice if you're gaining Victory cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 06, 2018, 03:09:39 am
Just wanted you to know if there's supposed to be a card image or something here, there isn't anything (at least nothing shows up for me).
Is it showing up for other people?

Here's the card text
Quote
Coffee Shop
$4 Action-Reserve
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.
(It'd probably be okay at $3 cost.)
Yeah, I'd try it at $2 or $3. When you play it, the net effects are -1 Card and -1 Action and when you call it the net effects are +1 Card (and +1 Action if the target is an Action) so they cancel each other out. It is basically a cantrip that provides the advantage that you quicker play the new card. So it does a similar job as sifters.

Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
This Salvager variant is fine but looks like a very artificial Reserve. I cannot imagine many situations in which you'd let this sit on your Tavern mat and not immediately call it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 06, 2018, 04:26:18 am
Reservist - $5 Action Reserve
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you gain a card, you may call this, to put that card on your Tavern mat.

Reminds me of this old card from my thread (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=9231.msg284777#msg284777)...
(http://i.imgur.com/oTPE2Ga.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 06, 2018, 05:35:59 am
Challenge #3 - Unique Reserve Call Submission

(https://i.imgur.com/yH4xo6R.jpg)

Some clarifications on how this plays:
-This cares about draw instructions as a whole and not individually drawn cards. So you could turn +2 Cards into +$3 Coin, but you could not choose to turn +2 Cards into +1 Card and +$3 Coin.
-Cards that have multiple draw instructions can have multiple Revolutionist called for it. So if a Peddler has a +1 Card token on it, it technically reads as +1 Card, +1 Card, +1 Action. +$1 Coin and thus can be turned into +$3 Coin, +$3 Coin, +1 Action, +$1 Coin (+$7 Coin, +1 Action).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gamer3000 on October 06, 2018, 09:39:46 am
Improvements
Type: Action - Reserve
Cost: $4
Put this on your Tavern mat
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this to instead gain a card costing up to $2 more than it. You may put it on top of your deck.
-
When you gain this, gain a cheaper card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 06, 2018, 09:48:45 am
Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
This Salvager variant is fine but looks like a very artificial Reserve. I cannot imagine many situations in which you'd let this sit on your Tavern mat and not immediately call it.

Anytime you trash something costing 0?

Reservist - $5 Action Reserve
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you gain a card, you may call this, to put that card on your Tavern mat.

I like this, but $5 seems too expensive. Island does something similar but is only $4. You can reuse this unlike Island, but it's slow. Island is also worth 2 VP.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 06, 2018, 09:55:07 am
Improvements
Type: Action - Reserve
Cost: $4
Put this on your Tavern mat
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this to instead gain a card costing up to $2 more than it. You may put it on top of your deck.
-
When you gain this, gain a cheaper card.
This seems too strong. Maybe make it cost 5? or have it only gain a card costing up to $1 more than it?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 06, 2018, 10:01:40 am
Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
This Salvager variant is fine but looks like a very artificial Reserve. I cannot imagine many situations in which you'd let this sit on your Tavern mat and not immediately call it.

Anytime you trash something costing 0?
This is only a thing if you have 2 copies of Smokehouse in your deck which is likely only a thing if you use Smokehouse to trash Coppers. So you wanna get that Smokehouse of the mat before you shuffle and leaving it on will likely (Fortress is the obvious exception plus gainers to constantly feed Smokehouse) only be a thing if you played the first Smokehouse to trash Copper and the shuffle is still long enough away and chances are that you can use the second Smokehouse to trash an Estate.
Definitely artificial.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 06, 2018, 10:06:53 am
(https://i.imgur.com/OaFaPqG.jpg)

Quote
Wine Critic
Cost: $4
Types: Action, Reserve
+1 Buy
Put this on your Tavern mat
----
After you buy a card, you may call this, for $3

Edit: An earlier version of this card missed out "Put this on your Tavern mat", and another called it the "reserve mat".
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 06, 2018, 10:16:45 am
Wine Critic
Cost: $4
Types: Action, Reserve
+1 Buy
----
After you buy a card, you may call this, for $3
This looks worse than Bridge. If you use the two Buys Bridge is +1 Buy +$3 but Bridge provides a Coin token in advance.
Despite the ability to save this for later the megaturn potential is actually lower as you need the extra Buys from another card. This is why I'd put the extra Buy on the calling part.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 06, 2018, 10:54:59 am
Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
This Salvager variant is fine but looks like a very artificial Reserve. I cannot imagine many situations in which you'd let this sit on your Tavern mat and not immediately call it.

Anytime you trash something costing 0?
This is only a thing if you have 2 copies of Smokehouse in your deck which is likely only a thing if you use Smokehouse to trash Coppers. So you wanna get that Smokehouse of the mat before you shuffle and leaving it on will likely (Fortress is the obvious exception plus gainers to constantly feed Smokehouse) only be a thing if you played the first Smokehouse to trash Copper and the shuffle is still long enough away and chances are that you can use the second Smokehouse to trash an Estate.
Definitely artificial.

Are you assuming that using the on-play as much as possible will always be better than leaving it on the Mat until something good is trashed by something else?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 06, 2018, 10:57:42 am
This looks worse than Bridge. If you use the two Buys Bridge is +1 Buy +$3 but Bridge provides a Coin token in advance.
Despite the ability to save this for later the megaturn potential is actually lower as you need the extra Buys from another card. This is why I'd put the extra Buy on the calling part.

That's a good comparison.  If you call it the same turn you play it, then you get the same benefit as a single Bridge, which is a good sign for a $4 card.

If you don't, then you need to play something later to be able to bring all your reserved wine critics back for your megaturn.  Another wine critic will do.  In some ways, this is stronger than a bridge, because although two bridges can be +2 Buy +$6, you can't achieve that without a third support card; whereas you can get +1 Buy +$6 with just two wine critics.

If it gave the +Buy on call, you could trigger it whenever you wanted by buying a copper, and you'd get +N buys into the bargain, which seems overly strong to me.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 06, 2018, 11:06:04 am
(https://i.imgur.com/tWD44Mp.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/1XPDwDZ.jpg)

Shouldn't a Brewery get you Beer?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 06, 2018, 11:36:11 am
In some ways, this is stronger than a bridge, because although two bridges can be +2 Buy +$6, you can't achieve that without a third support card; whereas you can get +1 Buy +$6 with just two wine critics.
I don't get what you mean with "support card", a village? Wine Critic and Bridge are both terminals so this comparison makes no sense. The only advantage of Wine Critic over Bridge is that you can save it for another turn. But then the extra Buy on the current turn was likely wasted.
Also note that two Bridges are the equivalent of either +1 Buy and +$6 or +2 Buys and +$8 (if you use all 3 Buys you get the cost reduction of 2 on the 3 cards that you buy).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: silvern on October 06, 2018, 12:04:09 pm
This one is maybe (=definitely) unwise for logistical reasons, but I think it's balanced!
(https://i.imgur.com/8bzNVXB.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 06, 2018, 12:58:29 pm
I don't get what you mean with "support card", a village?

Yep, village would be a good example of a card that would let you play two bridges.

Quote
Wine Critic and Bridge are both terminals so this comparison makes no sense. The only advantage of Wine Critic over Bridge is that you can save it for another turn.

And in that other turn, you can call your reserved WCs without needing an extra action.  So where Bridge needs a support card, WC doesn't.

Quote
Also note that two Bridges are the equivalent of either +1 Buy and +$6 or +2 Buys and +$8 (if you use all 3 Buys you get the cost reduction of 2 on the 3 cards that you buy).

Good point.  Maybe WC should be $4 when called?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 06, 2018, 12:59:33 pm
Shouldn't a Brewery get you Beer?
Oops. The question is, do I change Brewery to Winery or Wine to Beer or Mead?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on October 06, 2018, 04:10:58 pm
It would be nice to keep the winners, and possibly even all the entries, catalogued in the OP @Doomshark.

I thought about doing that. I decided against it because I wanted this to be something I could leave to run on its own if I had to. If enough people want me to, I can add a hall of fame to the op
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 06, 2018, 04:52:54 pm
It would be nice to keep the winners, and possibly even all the entries, catalogued in the OP @Doomshark.

I thought about doing that. I decided against it because I wanted this to be something I could leave to run on its own if I had to. If enough people want me to, I can add a hall of fame to the op
I think it's a good idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 06, 2018, 08:18:00 pm
Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
This Salvager variant is fine but looks like a very artificial Reserve. I cannot imagine many situations in which you'd let this sit on your Tavern mat and not immediately call it.

Anytime you trash something costing 0?
This is only a thing if you have 2 copies of Smokehouse in your deck which is likely only a thing if you use Smokehouse to trash Coppers. So you wanna get that Smokehouse of the mat before you shuffle and leaving it on will likely (Fortress is the obvious exception plus gainers to constantly feed Smokehouse) only be a thing if you played the first Smokehouse to trash Copper and the shuffle is still long enough away and chances are that you can use the second Smokehouse to trash an Estate.
Definitely artificial.
Unless I'm misunderstanding something, Smokehouse trashes a card before it ever reaches your Tavern mat, which means you wouldn't be able to call it until another card trashed something (so effectively one Smokehouse would require a second to generate Coffers on "each" play as you alternate the physical Smokehouses). The point I thought was that multiple Smokehouses can be called to a single trash effect, which means you could theoretically trash a Gold for +6 Coffers per Smokehouse on your Tavern mat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 07, 2018, 04:03:30 am
Revenant
Cost: $4
Type: Night/Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you gain a card, you may call this, to trash a card from the same supply pile.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 07, 2018, 09:13:53 am
I haven't played Dominion in a while and I have no idea if this is balanced...

Traitor
Cost: $3
Type: Action/Reserve
+1 Card
+1 Action
+2 Coffers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you buy a Duchy, you may call this.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 07, 2018, 09:36:10 am
Revenant
Cost: $4
Type: Night/Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you gain a card, you may call this, to trash a card from the same supply pile.

While I like the concept of the reserve effect, this is not a novel trigger.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 07, 2018, 12:34:45 pm
There's no real Dominion Reserve card that triggers on "when you gain a card." Duplicate is closest but that's restricted by price.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 07, 2018, 02:41:03 pm
Full image for my submission, using Eagle's wording suggestion:

(https://i.imgur.com/n36TruJ.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 07, 2018, 04:18:36 pm
There's no real Dominion Reserve card that triggers on "when you gain a card." Duplicate is closest but that's restricted by price.

Ah, yes, sorry. I forgot the price restriction on Duplicate.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 07, 2018, 05:29:59 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/jEi1bVV.jpg)
Quote
Bailey
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $2
Discard 4 cards. If you discarded any cards, +$4 and you may put this on your Tavern mat.
When another player plays an Attack, you may call this and then put this into your hand. If you do, you are unaffected by Attacks until the start of your next turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 07, 2018, 06:55:36 pm
There's no real Dominion Reserve card that triggers on "when you gain a card." Duplicate is closest but that's restricted by price.

Yes, this is exactly, what I also observed. There was no vanilla when-you-gain trigger.

Revenant is the idea of a replayable Acting Troupe. Unlike Acting Troupe, the actions are not usable in the same turn (if you forget about Villa). You can revive the Revenant later in different ways. You opponent plays a Witch? Gain a Curse, trash one from the Supply. That's the way to go.  You can also gather Villagers an collect your Revenants on you Tavern Mat to prepare a megaturn where you buy four Provinces, call three Revenants to trash the last three Provinces. Wow! It shares some similarities with Salt the Earth, will still being different. I had a lot of fun testing that card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 07, 2018, 08:33:04 pm
I haven't played Dominion in a while and I have no idea if this is balanced...

Traitor
Cost: $3
Type: Action/Reserve
+1 Card
+1 Action
+2 Coffers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you buy a Duchy, you may call this.
Things you call should have an on-call effect, otherwise it would be 'discard this from your Tavern mat,' like Wine Merchant. For the contest you should have an on-call effect, unless faust contradicts me.

Edit: Nevermind, ignore me.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 07, 2018, 10:39:05 pm
I haven't played Dominion in a while and I have no idea if this is balanced...

Traitor
Cost: $3
Type: Action/Reserve
+1 Card
+1 Action
+2 Coffers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you buy a Duchy, you may call this.
Things you call should have an on-call effect, otherwise it would be 'discard this from your Tavern mat,' like Wine Merchant. For the contest you should have an on-call effect, unless faust contradicts me.

You're right; I should have checked the wording on Wine Merchant first.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 08, 2018, 12:52:09 am
Wine Cellar
Action - Reserve - $4
+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
---
At the start of your Buy phase, you may call this, to spend all the coin tokens on it for $1 each. Otherwise, place a coin token on this.

Spending coin tokens works the same as using them from your Coffers. You must use all the tokens when you call the card (although you don't have to spend all the money you get from using them).

EDIT: I had a go at creating the card using Violet CLM's tool, here we go.
(https://i.imgur.com/LJLUHjQ.png) (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Wine%20Cellar&description=%2B1%20Action%0APut%20this%20on%20your%20tavern%20mat.%0A-%0AAt%20the%20start%20of%20your%20Buy%20phase%2C%20you%20may%20call%20this%2C%20to%20spend%20all%20the%20coin%20tokens%20on%20it%20for%20%241%20each.%20Otherwise%2C%20place%20a%20coin%20token%20on%20this.&type=Action%20-%20Reserve&credit=Joseph%20Haier&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F7%2F70%2FJoseph_Haier_-_Monks_in_a_cellar_1873.jpg&color0=5&color1=0&size=0)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 08, 2018, 01:57:46 am
I haven't played Dominion in a while and I have no idea if this is balanced...

Traitor
Cost: $3
Type: Action/Reserve
+1 Card
+1 Action
+2 Coffers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you buy a Duchy, you may call this.
Things you call should have an on-call effect, otherwise it would be 'discard this from your Tavern mat,' like Wine Merchant. For the contest you should have an on-call effect, unless faust contradicts me.

So, that means that cards like my Lady-in-Waiting don't qualify? Now I see why Fragasnap called his card first instead of putting it in his hand from his Tavern Mat directly...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 08, 2018, 04:58:17 am
(https://i.imgur.com/GjkyJcJ.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 08, 2018, 06:24:36 am
(https://i.imgur.com/lUQ383y.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on October 08, 2018, 11:32:16 am
Banker
Action - Reserve $4
You may discard a treasure from your hand for +2 Cards and +1 Action. Put this on your tavern mat.
----------------------------------------------
When you play a treasure, you may call this to trash that treasure.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 08, 2018, 01:40:56 pm
It is not a new design and an Avanto variant:

(https://i.imgur.com/fM0I06C.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 08, 2018, 02:15:30 pm
It is not a new design and an Avanto variant:

(https://i.imgur.com/13DhDMD.jpg)

Or perhaps a Wine Merchant (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Wine_Merchant) variant.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 08, 2018, 03:56:46 pm
It is not a new design and an Avanto variant:

(https://i.imgur.com/13DhDMD.jpg)
I think you need to change this to have an on-call effect, otherwise you are not calling it but discarding it, and the challenge says for the card to have a novel on-call effect. Also, if you leave it at discarding it should say 'discard this from your Tavern mat.'
Maybe faust doesn't really care if it is actually an on-call effect or just discarding it though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 08, 2018, 05:17:23 pm
Diarist - Action Reserve, $3 cost.
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you shuffle, you may call this, to pick one of the cards and set it aside face down. Put it into your hand at the start of your next turn, then discard this.

Nice card! Feels like a natural fit into what you should be able to do with Reserve cards. A very useful call effect that probably needs the weak on-play to balance it out.

I'm sure anyone playing this would have no problem figuring out what it does, but I think it could use a slight wording tweak to be more in-line with what is actually happening when it is called. This would be my suggestion:

(https://i.imgur.com/3ZXeOoL.jpg)

Also, is it your intention for Diarist to make the reshuffle that triggers it? If so, I'm not sure this will always be clear to the player that a called Diarist can set it itself aside for the next turn. You could make it a standard call clear this up and reduce the text at the same time. It would miss the reshuffle, but this nerf could open up buffing it in other areas like making it a cantrip, or giving it some coin on play. Here is how that could be worded (keeping the current on-play).

(https://i.imgur.com/odQ6t2F.jpg)

Hopefully I'm not overstepping by making a mockup for your card. I just think it's a great, clean card and I think it deserves to shine in this competition. Thanks for sharing!

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 08, 2018, 11:36:47 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/xmYDpCl.jpg)
Quote
Atelier

+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this, to instead gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.

$5
Action - Reserve

Edit: Forgot to put card type in the text version
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 09, 2018, 02:18:22 am
I haven't played Dominion in a while and I have no idea if this is balanced...

Traitor
Cost: $3
Type: Action/Reserve
+1 Card
+1 Action
+2 Coffers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
---
When you buy a Duchy, you may call this.
Things you call should have an on-call effect, otherwise it would be 'discard this from your Tavern mat,' like Wine Merchant. For the contest you should have an on-call effect, unless faust contradicts me.
I think I am fine with anything that has a way to remove itself from the Tavern mat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on October 09, 2018, 03:56:12 am
Diarist - Action Reserve, $3 cost.
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you shuffle, you may call this, to pick one of the cards and set it aside face down. Put it into your hand at the start of your next turn, then discard this.

Nice card! Feels like a natural fit into what you should be able to do with Reserve cards. A very useful call effect that probably needs the weak on-play to balance it out.

I'm sure anyone playing this would have no problem figuring out what it does, but I think it could use a slight wording tweak to be more in-line with what is actually happening when it is called.
I borrowed the wording from Star Chart. "When you shuffle, you may pick one of the cards" to set aside in the manner of Haven. Calling a Reserve brings it into play, so I hoped it would be intuitive to put the card face down under it to track what it was set aside for. 

Also, is it your intention for Diarist to make the reshuffle that triggers it? If so, I'm not sure this will always be clear to the player that a called Diarist can set it itself aside for the next turn. You could make it a standard call clear this up and reduce the text at the same time. It would miss the reshuffle, but this nerf could open up buffing it in other areas like making it a cantrip, or giving it some coin on play. Here is how that could be worded (keeping the current on-play).

(https://i.imgur.com/odQ6t2F.jpg)

Hopefully I'm not overstepping by making a mockup for your card. I just think it's a great, clean card and I think it deserves to shine in this competition. Thanks for sharing!
This second variant is almost exactly the intent, missing the shuffle to balance it further. I had it discard itself after it's done holding the card so it only misses one shuffle, but it may not need it?

I don't mind your mock-up at all, really I appreciate your post. I was on a tablet when I posted it so couldn't do a mock-up, so thanks.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 09, 2018, 03:16:20 pm
Diarist - Action Reserve, $3 cost.
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-
When you shuffle, you may call this, to pick one of the cards and set it aside face down. Put it into your hand at the start of your next turn, then discard this.

Nice card! Feels like a natural fit into what you should be able to do with Reserve cards. A very useful call effect that probably needs the weak on-play to balance it out.

I'm sure anyone playing this would have no problem figuring out what it does, but I think it could use a slight wording tweak to be more in-line with what is actually happening when it is called.
I borrowed the wording from Star Chart. "When you shuffle, you may pick one of the cards" to set aside in the manner of Haven. Calling a Reserve brings it into play, so I hoped it would be intuitive to put the card face down under it to track what it was set aside for. 

Also, is it your intention for Diarist to make the reshuffle that triggers it? If so, I'm not sure this will always be clear to the player that a called Diarist can set it itself aside for the next turn. You could make it a standard call clear this up and reduce the text at the same time. It would miss the reshuffle, but this nerf could open up buffing it in other areas like making it a cantrip, or giving it some coin on play. Here is how that could be worded (keeping the current on-play).

(https://i.imgur.com/odQ6t2F.jpg)

Hopefully I'm not overstepping by making a mockup for your card. I just think it's a great, clean card and I think it deserves to shine in this competition. Thanks for sharing!
This second variant is almost exactly the intent, missing the shuffle to balance it further. I had it discard itself after it's done holding the card so it only misses one shuffle, but it may not need it?

I don't mind your mock-up at all, really I appreciate your post. I was on a tablet when I posted it so couldn't do a mock-up, so thanks.

Ahh, I now see that the discarding of Diarist happens the next turn after putting the set aside card into your hand. I guess the problem would have been how does Diarist go from being called into play to being set aside? You'd need some extra text to execute that. As you already mentioned though, the second mockup should play essentially the same without any rules issues.

Glad you like the mockups. I won't at all be offended if you go with your own mockups though. Half the fun of making fan cards is getting the choose the artwork. Actually, half the time choosing the artwork is a nightmare for me, but that's other story.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 09, 2018, 03:29:00 pm
It is not a new design and an Avanto variant:

(https://i.imgur.com/13DhDMD.jpg)

My first thought/fear was that it's probably pretty good with Big Money as you will always have 1 extra Action at the end of each turn to get Azure Coves back into the shuffle, but this is essentially a less efficient Smithy Big Money Deck. So you've got a very powerful card that appears to become less efficient in mass quantities. Very nice design!

As others have said though, this should read "...to discard this from your Tavern mat."
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 09, 2018, 04:19:40 pm
Atelier

+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this, to instead gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.

$5
Action - Reserve
I like this. If you use it "normally" during your Buy phase it is to Baker as Coin of the Realm is to a Villagers. You cannot always use it like a Peddler though, e.g. when you hit 6 in a Kingdom without 7s you cannot use this to a gain a Province. So not all that great
But it can shine in combination with Workshop variants or as defense against junkers.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 09, 2018, 04:36:52 pm
Atelier

+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this, to instead gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.

$5
Action - Reserve
I like this. If you use it "normally" during your Buy phase it is to Baker as Coin of the Realm is to a Villagers. You cannot always use it like a Peddler though, e.g. when you hit 6 in a Kingdom without 7s you cannot use this to a gain a Province. So not all that great
But it can shine in combination with Workshop variants or as defense against junkers.
And much like with Smokehouse, you can save these up and use them on a single card gain, provided you have no gaps in card costs. In games with $7-cost cards, Poor House, and/or Bridge-variants, you could get Cursed, but then call series of Ateliers to eventually take you up to a good card. In most games, you should easily be able to buy a $2 card, then call four Ateliers to get a Gold.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 09, 2018, 05:16:30 pm
Atelier

+1 Card
+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this, to instead gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.

$5
Action - Reserve
I like this. If you use it "normally" during your Buy phase it is to Baker as Coin of the Realm is to a Villagers. You cannot always use it like a Peddler though, e.g. when you hit 6 in a Kingdom without 7s you cannot use this to a gain a Province. So not all that great
But it can shine in combination with Workshop variants or as defense against junkers.
And much like with Smokehouse, you can save these up and use them on a single card gain, provided you have no gaps in card costs. In games with $7-cost cards, Poor House, and/or Bridge-variants, you could get Cursed, but then call series of Ateliers to eventually take you up to a good card. In most games, you should easily be able to buy a $2 card, then call four Ateliers to get a Gold.

Maybe lose the +1 Card and make it cost $1 to enable that in every game?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on October 09, 2018, 06:43:46 pm
City Founders
$3 Action-Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
Place a Coin token each on two different non-Victory Action Supply piles.
-
When an opponent gains a non-Victory card, you may call this, to take the Coin tokens on that card's Supply pile as Coffers or Villagers.

Note: I had to specify "non-Victory" both times to prevent weird interactions with Trade Route.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 09, 2018, 08:38:31 pm
City Founders
$3 Action-Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
Place a Coin token on a non-Victory Action Supply pile.
-
When an opponent gains a non-Victory card, you may call this, to take the Coin tokens on that card's Supply pile as Coffers or Villagers.

Note: I had to specify "non-Victory" both times to prevent weird interactions with Trade Route.
This is interesting - however, it seems kind of weak. Assuming that you have a way to make your opponent gain a certain card (e.g. cursers) it gives you +2 Villagers and +1 of either coffers or villagers, which seems pretty good in the right situations, but still not particularly powerful. However, outside of that, you're playing a card for +2 Villagers (kind of like a more flexible Necropolis) and hoping your opponent buys a card with the tokens on top of it sometime soon, so that you can get your bonus and play the card again. Since its a village (and you're presumably going to want to be able to play them consistently), this makes it seem pretty weak.

However, the villager tokens probably alleviate some of the inconsistency problems and I haven't ever played with them, so maybe this is stronger than I think it looks.

It's also kind of neat how this card interacts with itself if the other player also has it. If you both have City Founders on your tavern mat, who will be the first one to buy a card with coin tokens on it? It seems like in this case you'd probably want to deny your opponent their City Founders though - having the ability to chain actions is usually much more powerful than any single card (this isn't an issue if there are other villages). I like the concept of it only being able to be called when your opponent gains a certain card, though - it just seems like it might work better on something that's not as integral to a deck as villages are.

Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 10, 2018, 07:45:32 am
Maybe lose the +1 Card and make it cost $1 to enable that in every game?
This might make it too good against junkers:
A plays Witch
B calls Atelier to gain an Atelier instead of a Curse


Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Yeah, it needs some tiebreaker / call order rules.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 10, 2018, 08:16:46 am
Maybe lose the +1 Card and make it cost $1 to enable that in every game?
This might make it too good against junkers:
A plays Witch
B calls Atelier to gain an Atelier instead of a Curse


Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Yeah, it needs some tiebreaker / call order rules.
A plays Witch after playing three bridges.
B calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
A calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
C calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
B calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
C calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
A gains 3 curses
B gains 2 curses
C gains 2 curses
Did I do that right? I could've gone on longer if I had made A play more bridges, because I only stopped because I ran out of Atteliers.
Fun stuff?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 10, 2018, 09:29:33 am
Maybe lose the +1 Card and make it cost $1 to enable that in every game?
This might make it too good against junkers:
A plays Witch
B calls Atelier to gain an Atelier instead of a Curse


Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Yeah, it needs some tiebreaker / call order rules.
A plays Witch after playing three bridges.
B calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
A calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
C calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
B calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
C calls two Atteliers and gains Ill Gotten Gains.
A gains 3 curses
B gains 2 curses
C gains 2 curses
Did I do that right? I could've gone on longer if I had made A play more bridges, because I only stopped because I ran out of Atteliers.
Fun stuff?

I think that's correct. (I was talking about City Founders, although its a good point that IGG+Atelier is kind of confusing. However, I would expect this to rarely show up in practice because playing a junker when everything on the board is cost reduced and your opponent has an Atelier is probably a sub-optimal move)

I actually had another variant of the card in mind that turns it into more of a Silver+ type of thing and lets it gain provinces;

Quote
Atelier Variant

+1 Action
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you would gain a card, you may call this, to instead gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

$5
Action - Reserve

I'm kind of worried that it would be too strong though because now you can use it on silver gainers to get $5's, gold gainers to get provinces, curses/ruins attacks to get $2's, and chaining them is insane. So this isn't my submission, the first Atelier still is.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 10, 2018, 09:52:07 am
Yeah, I think the easy solution is to never play with Atelier and IGG.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on October 10, 2018, 08:08:06 pm
City Founders
$3 Action-Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
Place a Coin token on a non-Victory Action Supply pile.
-
When an opponent gains a non-Victory card, you may call this, to take the Coin tokens on that card's Supply pile as Coffers or Villagers.

Note: I had to specify "non-Victory" both times to prevent weird interactions with Trade Route.
This is interesting - however, it seems kind of weak. Assuming that you have a way to make your opponent gain a certain card (e.g. cursers) it gives you +2 Villagers and +1 of either coffers or villagers, which seems pretty good in the right situations, but still not particularly powerful. However, outside of that, you're playing a card for +2 Villagers (kind of like a more flexible Necropolis) and hoping your opponent buys a card with the tokens on top of it sometime soon, so that you can get your bonus and play the card again. Since its a village (and you're presumably going to want to be able to play them consistently), this makes it seem pretty weak.

However, the villager tokens probably alleviate some of the inconsistency problems and I haven't ever played with them, so maybe this is stronger than I think it looks.

It's also kind of neat how this card interacts with itself if the other player also has it. If you both have City Founders on your tavern mat, who will be the first one to buy a card with coin tokens on it? It seems like in this case you'd probably want to deny your opponent their City Founders though - having the ability to chain actions is usually much more powerful than any single card (this isn't an issue if there are other villages). I like the concept of it only being able to be called when your opponent gains a certain card, though - it just seems like it might work better on something that's not as integral to a deck as villages are.

Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Yeah, I intended it as a non-attack interaction card.  I originally made the tokens stay on the piles permanently, but that seemed too powerful since it got exponential (your opponent gains a key card with three tokens on it; you call your five City Founders for 3x5=15 Coffers).  In multiplayer, players get the option to call City Founders in turn order, as with Reactions, etc.  Note that you can call it even if your opponent gains a card without tokens on it, if you just want to play it again (meaning that you can play it every turn unless your opponent gains no non-Victory cards).  And yes, you can poach your opponent's tokens if he gains the card first.

It's hard for me to gauge how strong it is, but you're probably right that it's a little weak.  I've edited it to add two tokens instead of one.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 10, 2018, 08:59:48 pm
City Founders
$3 Action-Reserve
+2 Villagers
Put this on your Tavern mat.
Place a Coin token on a non-Victory Action Supply pile.
-
When an opponent gains a non-Victory card, you may call this, to take the Coin tokens on that card's Supply pile as Coffers or Villagers.

Note: I had to specify "non-Victory" both times to prevent weird interactions with Trade Route.
This is interesting - however, it seems kind of weak. Assuming that you have a way to make your opponent gain a certain card (e.g. cursers) it gives you +2 Villagers and +1 of either coffers or villagers, which seems pretty good in the right situations, but still not particularly powerful. However, outside of that, you're playing a card for +2 Villagers (kind of like a more flexible Necropolis) and hoping your opponent buys a card with the tokens on top of it sometime soon, so that you can get your bonus and play the card again. Since its a village (and you're presumably going to want to be able to play them consistently), this makes it seem pretty weak.

However, the villager tokens probably alleviate some of the inconsistency problems and I haven't ever played with them, so maybe this is stronger than I think it looks.

It's also kind of neat how this card interacts with itself if the other player also has it. If you both have City Founders on your tavern mat, who will be the first one to buy a card with coin tokens on it? It seems like in this case you'd probably want to deny your opponent their City Founders though - having the ability to chain actions is usually much more powerful than any single card (this isn't an issue if there are other villages). I like the concept of it only being able to be called when your opponent gains a certain card, though - it just seems like it might work better on something that's not as integral to a deck as villages are.

Also, how does it work in multiplayer?
Yeah, I intended it as a non-attack interaction card.  I originally made the tokens stay on the piles permanently, but that seemed too powerful since it got exponential (your opponent gains a key card with three tokens on it; you call your five City Founders for 3x5=15 Coffers).  In multiplayer, players get the option to call City Founders in turn order, as with Reactions, etc.  Note that you can call it even if your opponent gains a card without tokens on it, if you just want to play it again (meaning that you can play it every turn unless your opponent gains no non-Victory cards).  And yes, you can poach your opponent's tokens if he gains the card first.

It's hard for me to gauge how strong it is, but you're probably right that it's a little weak.  I've edited it to add two tokens instead of one.

Wow, I didn't realize that you could call it even if your opponent gains non-victory cards without tokens on them. In that case, ~90% of the criticisms I had of the card are completely invalid. This also makes endgame with this card a lot more interesting than my misread-version, because when your opponent greens, they also deny you your villages that you were probably getting to use a lot before that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 10, 2018, 10:41:16 pm
Vanishing City
Action - Reserve - $3

+2 Cards
Put this on your Tavern mat.
-----
When you play a Vanishing City, you may call this, for +1 Action.
Isn't each one after the first a Laboratory? I mean, you can stack them for multiple +Actions, but you could also ignore that and just have $3 Laboratories.

Coffee Shop
$4 Action-Reserve
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.
This wants to accelerate higher cost cards at the cost of buying and playing the Coffee Shop first. I'm not sure if this will ever be worth the opportunity cost as written, though I like it a fair bit. It needs to be cheaper and easier to get onto your Tavern mat.

Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
The fact that it can't trigger off of itself is a neat limiter to the power of Coffers. The stacking is something that I'd like to see play out in some games.

Revolutionist
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Put this on your Tavern mat.
When you would draw any number of cards (of any number), you may call this to instead get +$3.
I like this. It's a weak draw that turns any non-stop card into economy once you're ready for economy. I think it might need to cost $6. Does anyone else have any thoughts about this one?

Dwarven Smith
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $2
+1 Action. Put this on your Tavern mat.
When you gain a Gold, you may call this to gain a card costing up to $2 per Dwarven Smith remaining on your Tavern mat.
It takes 5 Dwarven Smiths to get Gold\Province\Duchy, which you could theoretically setup to do again. Curious, though I'm not sure this is very flexible since you have to gain Golds and then weather the Dwarven Smiths coming back home.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 11, 2018, 02:16:23 am
Modded my card so it isn't so weak.

Quote
Coffee Shop
$3 Action-Reserve
+1 Action.
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 11:12:09 am
Smokehouse
Action-Reserve - $4

Trash a card from your hand.
Put this on your Tavern mat.
----
When you trash a card, you may call this, for +1 Coffers per $1 it costs.
The fact that it can't trigger off of itself is a neat limiter to the power of Coffers. The stacking is something that I'd like to see play out in some games.
Player 1 (I'll call them Owen) has 4 Smokehouses on his Tavern mat.
Owen plays a Smokehouse.
Owen trashes a Province.
Owen calls a Smokehouse for +8 Coffers.
Owen calls a Smokehouse for +8 Coffers.
Owen calls a Smokehouse for +8 Coffers.
Owen calls a Smokehouse for +8 Coffers.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 11:13:16 am
Modded my card so it isn't so weak.

Quote
Coffee Shop
$3 Action-Reserve
+1 Action.
Put this on your tavern mat.
-
When you gain an action or treasure card, you may call this to set aside the gained card and play it at the start of your next turn.
That should work.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 11:33:30 am
Here's Chappy7's Scrapper with the image fixed. I hope this is okay.
(https://i.imgur.com/jHghZdx.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 11, 2018, 04:26:38 pm
Here's Chappy7's Scrapper with the image fixed. I hope this is okay.
(https://i.imgur.com/jHghZdx.jpg)

Yes thank you.  Except I think I'll be editing my entry to say "When you play your second Copper this turn, you may call this to trash that Copper." so it isn't always better than moneylender, and a bit more interesting. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: grrgrrgrr on October 11, 2018, 05:30:45 pm
My idea:

Servant
$4 Action/Reserve
2$, +1 Buy
Put this on your Tavern Mat.
-----------------------
At the end of your Buy phase, you may move this card from the Tavern mat onto your deck.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 06:28:29 pm
Here's Chappy7's Scrapper with the image fixed. I hope this is okay.
(https://i.imgur.com/jHghZdx.jpg)

Yes thank you.  Except I think I'll be editing my entry to say "When you play your second Copper this turn, you may call this to trash that Copper." so it isn't always better than moneylender, and a bit more interesting.
Here's the cropped image if you want it:
https://i.imgur.com/vQq964w.jpg (https://i.imgur.com/vQq964w.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 11, 2018, 08:21:48 pm
Fur coat-
+1 Action +2💵
Put this on your tavern mat.
覧覧覧覧覧
When an attack is played not during
Your turn you may call this and gain
A gold;otherwise At the start of your
Next turn you may call this to gain a
Card costing up to 4💵.

4💵  Action-Reserve

If your wearing a fur coat you might find you might find some money in it
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 11, 2018, 10:05:38 pm
Fur coat-
+1 Action +2💵
Put this on your tavern mat.
覧覧覧覧覧
When an attack is played not during
Your turn you may call this and gain
A gold;otherwise At the start of your
Next turn you may call this to gain a
Card costing up to 4💵.

4💵  Action-Reserve

If your wearing a fur coat you might find you might find some money in it
I'm not quite sure when you would gain a card costing up to $4 here...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 12, 2018, 10:06:48 am
The Judging should be sometime today, right?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 12, 2018, 10:10:44 am
The Judging should be sometime today, right?
Indeed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 12, 2018, 10:44:55 am
Well, this has not not been easy, as we've seen a lot of submissions, and a bunch of really solid ones too. I'll give a top 3:

1. Wine Cellar (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg773077#msg773077) by ConMan

The design is very simple and yet compelling. If you get this early, you might cash in for 10 or more Coffers in the endgame, but you hurt your deck building. I have always liked the stockpiling aspect of Duplicate and this goes in a similar direction.

2. City Founders (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg773253#msg773253) by Erick648

This offers interesting interaction similar to Gathering cards, and is a quite unique Village that your opponent can block by going full BM. It's intriguing, though I am not sure it should be limited to Action cards. And interactions may get too unpredictable in multiplayer.

3. Bailey (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg773055#msg773055) by Fragasnap

It's a more interesting Attack blocker than what we have so far. I also like the on-play effect; it is very situational and still may be strong occasionally, and thus a good fit for a $2. One thing I might want changed is that it protects you until the end of your turn. It may get more interesting if it only protects you from a single attack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 12, 2018, 02:24:28 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/jEi1bVV.jpg)
Quote
Bailey
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $2
Discard 4 cards. If you discarded any cards, +$4 and you may put this on your Tavern mat.
When another player plays an Attack, you may call this and then put this into your hand. If you do, you are unaffected by Attacks until the start of your next turn.

Whoops, this card has an issue, that it also gives you the +$4, if you have only one card in your hand, very similar to Tactician. This could be abusable with disappearing money like Festival, Harvest, Candlestick Maker, Pawn and even Poor House.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 12, 2018, 03:01:59 pm
3. Bailey (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg773055#msg773055) by Fragasnap

It's a more interesting Attack blocker than what we have so far. I also like the on-play effect; it is very situational and still may be strong occasionally, and thus a good fit for a $2. One thing I might want changed is that it protects you until the end of your turn. It may get more interesting if it only protects you from a single attack.
Blocking a single Attack in 2-player games would probably be okay, but in multiplayer I am almost sure it would be weak and, more importantly, immensely frustrating--especially around the hand-size Attacks which Bailey doesn't like. Bailey in a standard hand doesn't care too much about Attacks (discards junk, discard a smaller hand for +$4 anyway), but when you call it to block an Attack it jumps straight into your hand, meaning you will typically have a 6-card hand with a Bailey that doesn't have to discard everything. Blocking a single Cutpurse to then suffer a different Cutpurse anyway would feel really bad.
I felt like blanket protection was the easiest to track and the best solution. Would you consider it significantly improved if it read "If you do, you are unaffected by copies of that Attack until the start of your next turn"?

Bailey
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $2
Discard 4 cards. If you discarded any cards, +$4 and you may put this on your Tavern mat.
When another player plays an Attack, you may call this and then put this into your hand. If you do, you are unaffected by Attacks until the start of your next turn.
Whoops, this card has an issue, that it also gives you the +$4, if you have only one card in your hand, very similar to Tactician. This could be abusable with disappearing money like Festival, Harvest, Candlestick Maker, Pawn and even Poor House.
That is entirely the point.  You ideally reduce your hand to 2 cards to get +$4 out of them on a Bailey play.  It also doesn't automatically go to your Tavern mat so you might be able to abuse this feature in Kingdoms without Attacks.
You need to discard at least 1 card to avoid obvious issues with Throne Room variants.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 13, 2018, 10:15:55 pm
...When are we going to get the next challenge?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 14, 2018, 12:44:35 am
...When are we going to get the next challenge?

Not in good time. ConMan is trying to ice our creativity.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 14, 2018, 05:54:22 pm
5. If the winner does not post within a reasonable amount of time, the runner-up may post the next challenge

Do we let Erick648 post a challenge yet?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 14, 2018, 05:58:07 pm
...When are we going to get the next challenge?

Not in good time. ConMan is trying to ice our creativity.
Also weekends and Australian time zones can get in the way of my posting. That said, thanks for picking my card, faust!

The new challenge is:

Design a card with variable cost.

I'll leave the details up for interpretation - maybe it works like Peddler, maybe it has an alternative means of being gained, maybe you can find some way to have two different costs on the card and rules for figuring out which one to use.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 14, 2018, 06:04:50 pm
...When are we going to get the next challenge?

Not in good time. ConMan is trying to ice our creativity.
Also weekends and Australian time zones can get in the way of my posting. That said, thanks for picking my card, faust!

The new challenge is:

Design a card with variable cost.

I'll leave the details up for interpretation - maybe it works like Peddler, maybe it has an alternative means of being gained, maybe you can find some way to have two different costs on the card and rules for figuring out which one to use.
Sorry for being impatient  :-[. Good Challenge!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 14, 2018, 07:17:27 pm
The new challenge is:

Design a card with variable cost.

Here's my entry:

(https://i.imgur.com/63BHreBl.png)

Quote
Rare Earth
Treasure - $5
--
When you play this, choose one: +$1 and gain a Rare Earth; or return this for +$ equal to its cost.
-
This costs $1 less for every two Rare Earth in the Supply (round down).

As always, feedback is appreciated.

Edit: Reworded for concision.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 14, 2018, 07:41:16 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/FwY7SiT.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 14, 2018, 08:09:52 pm
Might as well try something random myself here.

(https://i.imgur.com/VaL6KDH.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 14, 2018, 09:59:28 pm
Might as well try something random myself here.

(https://i.imgur.com/VaL6KDH.png)

I'm not 100% on the rules of when you can pay off debt but you may not be able to use the when buy +$5 on paying off the debt incurred buying the card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 14, 2018, 10:29:14 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/XdOTDNk.jpg)
Quote
Gleaners
Types: Action
Cost: $4*
Look through your discard pile. Trash a card from it or your hand and gain a differently named card costing up to $1 more than it.
During your turn, if your discard pile is empty, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.

Archive
Quote
Gleaners
Types: Action
Cost: $4*
+2 Cards. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.
-----
During your turn, if your discard pile is empty, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 14, 2018, 10:38:25 pm
Might as well try something random myself here.

(https://i.imgur.com/VaL6KDH.png)

I'm not 100% on the rules of when you can pay off debt but you may not be able to use the when buy +$5 on paying off the debt incurred buying the card.

On my phone so I can't go into too much detail, but the Debt can be paid off after Outskirts is gained.

As for the card itself... awesome looking! I loathe your ability to make a good Duchy alternative.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 14, 2018, 10:57:33 pm
Quote
Gleaners
Types: Action
Cost: $4*
+2 Cards. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.
During your turn, if your discard pile is empty, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.
This is really powerful. I have a $4 card with the same upper half and it was strong enough to give it a drawback.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 15, 2018, 12:31:00 am
Might as well try something random myself here.

I'm not 100% on the rules of when you can pay off debt but you may not be able to use the when buy +$5 on paying off the debt incurred buying the card.
I wasn't sure myself until I realized this is pretty much what you do for each debt cost card there is.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 15, 2018, 01:25:46 am
Reconstruct
Type: Action
Cost: $6*

Trash a non-Treasure card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

--
In your Buy phase, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 15, 2018, 08:39:03 am
I'm not 100% on the rules of when you can pay off debt but you may not be able to use the when buy +$5 on paying off the debt incurred buying the card.
Debt can be paid off during the Buy phase.  Capital gives special permission to pay off Debt because it is typically discarded from play (thus incurring Debt) during Clean-Up, when Debt cannot normally be paid.

Quote
Gleaners
Types: Action
Cost: $4*
+2 Cards. Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $1 more than it.
During your turn, if your discard pile is empty, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.
This is really powerful. I have a $4 card with the same upper half and it was strong enough to give it a drawback.
Considering how players are still sleeping on Remodel, I know it is strong--most players discredit the power of trash-for-benefits.  I'll take your advice and post a weaker version as I enjoyed but am not married to the quoted version.
Quote
Gleaners
Types: Action
Cost: $4*
Look through your discard pile. Trash a card from it or your hand and gain a differently named card costing up to $1 more than it.
During your turn, if your discard pile is empty, this costs $3 less, but not less than $0.
*Original post updated.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 15, 2018, 09:09:05 am
(https://i.imgur.com/5U7nQZG.jpg)

Quote
Grand High Witch
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $8*

+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
While this is in the supply, during your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile.  When you buy this, you may return any number of Curse cards from your hand or discard pile to the supply.  For each one you return, this costs $1 less, to a minimum of $0.

Clarification: You may buy this card so long as you have enough coins to pay its reduced cost.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 15, 2018, 09:28:22 am
As for the card itself... awesome looking! I loathe your ability to make a good Duchy alternative.
He he, thanks... ;)
What can I say, I love me some alt-VP <3
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 15, 2018, 01:51:00 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/qHXiAj4.png) (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Priory&description=%2B1%20Buy%0ATrash%20up%20to%20three%20differently%20named%20cards%20from%20your%20hand.%0A%2B%20%242%20per%20card%20trashed%20this%20way.%0A%0A-%0A%0AWhen%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20as%20many%20times%0Aas%20you%20wish%20until%20this%20costs%20less%0Athan%20%242%2C%20you%20may%20gain%20a%20Ruins%0Ato%20make%20this%20cost%20%242%20less.&type=Action%20-%20Looter&credit=Illustration%3A%20Thomas%20Girtin&price=%248*&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fd3ngf76mkj9kfv.cloudfront.net%2F2018%2F04%2F17080246%2FInterior-of-Lindisfarne-Priory-Thomas-Girtin-Oil-Painting.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gamer3000 on October 15, 2018, 03:44:41 pm
Propaganda
Type: Treasure
Cost: $6*
$2
+1 Buy
-
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Villager.
-
This costs $1 more per Villager on your mat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 15, 2018, 04:43:00 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/52MhBUL.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 15, 2018, 04:58:45 pm
Eeegads some of this wording is annoying me:

Propaganda
Type: Treasure
Cost: $6*
$2
+1 Buy
-
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Villager.
-
This costs $1 more per Villager on your mat.

This needs better timing, like Peddler: "During your turn, this costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) more per Villager you have on your mat."

Renovate

This doesn't need the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png)? in the cost, the on-buy effect works on its own.

Outskirts

You could just do this as "When you buy this, you may trash an Action from your hand. If you didn't, take (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/21/Debt5.png/18px-Debt5.png)." Now the wording before was technically correct, but this would have fewer rules clarifications with paying off (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png) and would have a normal coin cost.

Rare Earth
Treasure - $5
When you play this, choose one: +$1 and gain a Rare Earth; or return this for +$ equal to its cost.
-
This costs $1 less for every two Rare Earth in the Supply (round down).

"When you play this, choose one: +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) and gain a Rare Earth; or return this to the supply for +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) equal to its cost in (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png).
-
During your turn, this costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for every two copies of Rare Earth in the Supply (round down)."
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 15, 2018, 05:10:46 pm
Renovate

You made this in-between the time that I read through the current submissions and finished up my own, sorry if mine's a bit similar to yours.
I think they're different enough that I'll post mine anyways, though:

(https://i.imgur.com/YKM665P.jpg)

Quote
Prophet
$2* Action

+ $2
Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. Trash any number of them, then put the rest back in any order.
-
This costs 2 debt more per copper you have in play.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 15, 2018, 05:30:25 pm
Prophet
$2* Action

+ $2
Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. Trash any number of them, then put the rest back in any order.
-
This costs 2 debt more per copper you have in play.

Again, there's no reason to put (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png) in the cost (other than to fulfil the challenge). Just make it "When you gain this, take 2(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png) per Copper you have in play." It's much simpler from a rules standpoint.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 15, 2018, 05:50:53 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/ZDRm3Hi.png)

Clarification: Cost reduction effects such as Bridge and Highway will make General cost fewer Debt during your Buy phase.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on October 15, 2018, 06:12:17 pm
(https://imgur.com/gPuU9aY.jpg)

Quote
Silver Smelter
$7* Action

+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Gain a Silver.

Silver produces $1 more this turn.
---
This costs $1 less per Silver you have in play.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: GendoIkari on October 15, 2018, 06:34:06 pm

Quote
Grand High Witch
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $8*

+2 Cards
+1 Action
Each other player gains a Curse.
----
While this is in the supply, during your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile.  When you buy this, you may return any number of Curse cards from your hand or discard pile to the supply.  For each one you return, this costs $1 less, to a minimum of $0.

Clarification: You may buy this card so long as you have enough coins to pay its reduced cost.

I feel like this needs to be reworded somehow. I see exactly what you intend to happen, but not sure that it works with the rules. Your clarification says you may buy it so long as you have enough to pay its reduced cost, but until after you have bought it, there is no way to determine what that reduced cost is! I think you need to have a way of reducing the cost before the buy actually happens. But the only way I can think of to keep identical functionality without breaking rules is pretty messy wording:

In games using this, at the start of your buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and reveal any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand. This costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse revealed this way. When you buy this, return all revealed Curses to the supply.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 15, 2018, 06:42:52 pm
Might as well try something random myself here.

(https://i.imgur.com/VaL6KDH.png)

The wonderful thing about this card is that when first reading it, I thought "it probably needs to also give +1 buy when you buy it, because otherwise there's always a chance that you won't have anything you can do with that (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png) you just got... OH WAIT it costs debt too!"
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 15, 2018, 10:01:27 pm
Eeegads some of this wording is annoying me:

Propaganda
Type: Treasure
Cost: $6*
$2
+1 Buy
-
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Villager.
-
This costs $1 more per Villager on your mat.

This needs better timing, like Peddler: "During your turn, this costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) more per Villager you have on your mat."

Renovate

This doesn't need the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png)? in the cost, the on-buy effect works on its own.

Outskirts

You could just do this as "When you buy this, you may trash an Action from your hand. If you didn't, take (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/21/Debt5.png/18px-Debt5.png)." Now the wording before was technically correct, but this would have fewer rules clarifications with paying off (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png) and would have a normal coin cost.

Rare Earth
Treasure - $5
When you play this, choose one: +$1 and gain a Rare Earth; or return this for +$ equal to its cost.
-
This costs $1 less for every two Rare Earth in the Supply (round down).

"When you play this, choose one: +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) and gain a Rare Earth; or return this to the supply for +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) equal to its cost in (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png).
-
During your turn, this costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for every two copies of Rare Earth in the Supply (round down)."
Just wanna say, I agree with all of this, and I was actually literally just going to say the same thing about Outskirts.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 15, 2018, 10:19:55 pm
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/Lw_v39lN0BMXHyoTwiVlVkVeK6OUck1atpi9dzNwjymzUe583fRqM-zsLRivs7cLy7SinavPiQ=w285-h437-no)
Older Version:
-
This costs $1 less per card you have multiple copies of in play.
First Submission:
$6* Lost Temple
Action-Doom
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
While this is in the Supply, once per turn during your buy phase you may
receive the next Hex. If you do, +1 Buy and this costs $3 less.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 15, 2018, 10:52:13 pm
Taking some advice from earlier to fix Rare Earth:

(https://i.imgur.com/nZUTxkEl.png)

Quote
Rare Earth
Treasure - $6*
--
When you play this, choose one: +$1 and gain a Rare Earth; or return this to the supply for +$1 equal to its cost in $.
-
This costs $1 less for every two copies of Rare Earth in the Supply (round down).

I did not add the "During your turn" bit, though, because I want the cost to be the same for all players at all times.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 15, 2018, 11:05:07 pm
I agree Outskirts would work as ThetaSigma suggested. Personally, I regard it as still being a card with "variable cost" then, but that's up to Con Man.
It loses the debt in the "cost" cost, which you can see as both a good and a bad thing. For instance, it's easier to wrap your head around it being a 5$ basically if you trash a card, but it might be easier to miss that you need to take debt if you don't.

(https://i.imgur.com/DoHxgQ6.png)

Not sure here. If I HAVE to decide for a version, I think this is the right one. Even if it's less flashy and perhaps not considered as "variable cost".
Edit: On second thought, a cost of 5$ would make it gainable by Remodels, which might be a tad too good... On the other hand, a Remodel already trashes a card from your hand. Perhaps I should just make it on gain. But then you could still give it to somebody with a.g. Swindler... You know what, I will think about this before the deadline ends.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 16, 2018, 12:34:47 am
(https://i.imgur.com/qHXiAj4.png) (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Priory&description=%2B1%20Buy%0ATrash%20up%20to%20three%20differently%20named%20cards%20from%20your%20hand.%0A%2B%20%242%20per%20card%20trashed%20this%20way.%0A%0A-%0A%0AWhen%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20as%20many%20times%0Aas%20you%20wish%20until%20this%20costs%20less%0Athan%20%242%2C%20you%20may%20gain%20a%20Ruins%0Ato%20make%20this%20cost%20%242%20less.&type=Action%20-%20Looter&credit=Illustration%3A%20Thomas%20Girtin&price=%248*&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fd3ngf76mkj9kfv.cloudfront.net%2F2018%2F04%2F17080246%2FInterior-of-Lindisfarne-Priory-Thomas-Girtin-Oil-Painting.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0)
This bears a strong resemblance to death cart when you think about it, but I like it. It may be a little too strong as-is. Death Cart has the drawback that you have to trash an action card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on October 16, 2018, 01:00:56 am
(https://imgur.com/gPuU9aY.jpg)

Quote
Silver Smelter
$7* Action

+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
Gain a Silver.

Silver produces $1 more this turn.
---
This costs $1 less per Silver you have in play.

I am wondering if I should change this to +2 Cards instead of being a cantrip. That would make it much better as a BM enabler and it feels nicer from a flavor perspective. But it's moving away a little from what I was originally hoping for with the design - a card that could be strong with support in BM, but also could be a critical component of interesting engines that like silver.

With the current design I feel pretty alright about the pricing given its comparisons to market and grand market. If I changed it to +2 cards, it might need a bump to $8* because of it's BM strength but I am not so confident in that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 16, 2018, 02:52:14 am
(https://i.imgur.com/52MhBUL.png)
This is my favourite. Superficially it looks like a mixture between Woodcutter, Cemetery and Donate but it will probably play very differently.
Wording-wise is should probably be something like "When you buy this, look through your discard pile, trash ..."


(https://i.imgur.com/yxnsGkz.jpg?1)
Even though there are some nice interactions between the cost reduction and the Hexing (War can trash your Lost Temple, Locusts makes a $2 out of it or trashes it) this is far too good; just compare it to Cursed Village.
I have a hard time imaging situations in which you hit $6 and don't take a Curse in order to be able to buy 2 Lost Temples (unless you want the cost reduction to be only applicable for the Buy and not until the end of the turn).

You could fix it e.g. via self-junking and for thematic reasons I'd pick Ruins. If there is no junking or sifting you paid $3 for a village that draws an extra card while having added a dead card to your deck so the two effects roughly balance each other out. If there is sifting or trashing though you can get rid off or sift through the dead card and you still got a bargain for $3.
So perhaps only reduce the cost by $2?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread #4: variable cost
Post by: Aquila on October 16, 2018, 05:08:12 am
(https://i.imgur.com/RE6N6do.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 16, 2018, 06:49:40 am
I feel like this needs to be reworded somehow. I see exactly what you intend to happen, but not sure that it works with the rules. Your clarification says you may buy it so long as you have enough to pay its reduced cost, but until after you have bought it, there is no way to determine what that reduced cost is! I think you need to have a way of reducing the cost before the buy actually happens. But the only way I can think of to keep identical functionality without breaking rules is pretty messy wording:

In games using this, at the start of your buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and reveal any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand. This costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse revealed this way. When you buy this, return all revealed Curses to the supply.

I agree the wording needs work.  I considered an "at the start of your buy phase" wording, but that isn't quite how I want it to work for multiple buys; with that wording, you could reveal 8 curses and then every GHW you buy would cost $0.

Perhaps something like this:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  This card costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse still set aside in this way, to a minimum of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).  When you buy this card, return a set-aside Curse to the supply for each (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) that its price has been reduced by in this way.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside curses.

It's still pretty messy - I'm not happy with the "for each $1 that its price has been reduced by in this way" part, but I don't see how else to make it play properly with Bridge and friends.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 16, 2018, 07:18:28 am
I did not add the "During your turn" bit, though, because I want the cost to be the same for all players at all times.

You need that clause there to determine the timing, and with that clause, it would affect all the copies of Rare Earth, even those owned by other players. See Peddler.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 16, 2018, 07:36:22 am
(https://i.imgur.com/dYyaMV3.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/JnuyjwW.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 16, 2018, 07:43:15 am
Neat idea. It should be "the" Compass to be consistent with official cards, though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 16, 2018, 11:30:26 am
I wanted to try making an Event with variable cost.

(https://i.imgur.com/4iELe9M.png)

Original version had a base cost of $2
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 16, 2018, 11:33:43 am
I wanted to try making an Event with variable cost.
Just letting you know, it says 'The image you are requesting does not exist or is no longer available.'
Edit: Nevermind, you fixed it already.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 16, 2018, 12:06:48 pm
I wanted to try making an Event with variable cost.

(https://i.imgur.com/Hqcy0xo.png)

Neat. One thing I don't like about the cost ratios are that if you plan to buy 2 cards this turn, there's absolutely no difference between buying 2 cards outright, or buying this event once and then buying those 2 cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 16, 2018, 12:13:41 pm
I wanted to try making an Event with variable cost.

(https://i.imgur.com/Hqcy0xo.png)
Doesn't this just give you buys for free? (as long as the cards you buy are expensive enough) The first one finances itself if you buy 2 cards, and each subsequent one will even make a net profit.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 16, 2018, 12:16:57 pm
I wanted to try making an Event with variable cost.

(https://i.imgur.com/Hqcy0xo.png)
Doesn't this just give you buys for free? (as long as the cards you buy are expensive enough) The first one finances itself if you buy 2 cards, and each subsequent one will even make a net profit.

It doesn't reduce the costs of Events; only Cards. So to buy it twice, you would need (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png) on hand (and then you'd get a refund of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) for each card you bought).

*Edit* I mean, yes, if you have enough money to spend, and are going to use up all your buys, then this does indeed give you more free money and buys. But it's a "rich get richer" type thing; it could turn (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png) into (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) if you are going to buy 3 cards, or turn (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/9d/Coin9.png/16px-Coin9.png) into (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/d/df/Coin11.png/16px-Coin11.png) if you are going to buy 4 cards, etc. But you need a lot of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) to start with to use it more than a couple times.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 16, 2018, 12:22:18 pm
Of course you need the cash to buy multiple cards; the same thing is also true if you, you know, just want to buy multiple cards. This card just makes it so whenever you want an extra buy, you can have it (modulo buying other Events or things already costing $0).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 16, 2018, 12:53:25 pm
As faust has pointed out, this is broken as it does more than give you Buys for free (which would already be broken). You could e.g. get 4 Provinces for 29 (instead of 32 and 3 extra Buys ) and 8 Provinces for 43 (instead of 64 and 7 extra Buys).
Travelling Fair style conversion of stuff into each other is fine but free beer isn't.


At a base price of $4 the Event would be OKish though:

# times you buy the Event - cumulated cost - benefit in Coins - net Coin yield - net Coin yield of Travelling Fair

1 |   4 |  2 | -2 | -2
2 |   9 |  6 | -3 | -4
3 | 14 | 12 | -2 | -6
4 | 20 | 20 |  0 | -8
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 16, 2018, 01:22:11 pm
I disagree with the notion that free stuff was automatically bad. Events that give you free stuff make you play a variant of Dominion where that stuff is free. Nothing broken about that.
As such, I don't think that giving you free coins if you already have many is broken, either. You now play a variant of Dominion where buying cards progressively makes further cards cheaper. All players are playing the same variant. There is no asymmetry here, it's not like only one player can have this. It's not random, the Event is there from the start, everybody knows it. It doesn't break the game, because no card except Ruins gives only a buy, so you don't just lose all that many decisions. Instead, you now are encouraged to go for a special strategy, which creates decisions.
Not making a statement about whether this would be fun, by the way. But variants aren't broken.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 16, 2018, 01:42:59 pm
Indeed the event was intended to give you free money eventually; otherwise I don't think there would be an incentive to build up enough to buy it more than a couple of times. It's a fair point that a base cost of $2 maybe reduces how interesting the decisions are. I'll change it so that the base is $3 instead, that way you're breaking even if you buy it thrice (but can be doing better if you have other sources of +buy).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 16, 2018, 01:49:04 pm
I disagree with the notion that free stuff was automatically bad. Events that give you free stuff make you play a variant of Dominion where that stuff is free. Nothing broken about that.
As such, I don't think that giving you free coins if you already have many is broken, either. You now play a variant of Dominion where buying cards progressively makes further cards cheaper. All players are playing the same variant. There is no asymmetry here, it's not like only one player can have this. It's not random, the Event is there from the start, everybody knows it. It doesn't break the game, because no card except Ruins gives only a buy, so you don't just lose all that many decisions. Instead, you now are encouraged to go for a special strategy, which creates decisions.
Not making a statement about whether this would be fun, by the way. But variants aren't broken.
Well agreed, but I don't think handing out buys for free improves the game, or is a particularly interesting variant. Delve is a nice variant, but the fact that buys are limited plays a pretty big part in what makes Dominion challenging.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 16, 2018, 02:04:43 pm
Champion being played at turn 1 is indeed not broken but it would not lead to particularly interesting games. Same applies for Champion for Buys being played at turn 1.

There are deckbuilding games without Buy or Action restrictions and while I don't dislike playing a match of Star Realms from time to time the lack of these very restrictions makes the Ascension/Star Realms/Hero Realms family of deckbuilding games extremely fluffy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 16, 2018, 02:04:50 pm
Right, thinking more about the math, I agree with Faust and disagree with my earlier post.

The problem here is that this event as costed completely removes "+buy" as a resource in the game. It almost reads "in games using this, you can buy any number of cards per turn". That just removes a full part of Dominion strategy.

Now, it IS interesting that it allows you to afford more if you are buying more. Making it so that you can buy 2 (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png) cards with only (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/4/47/Coin8.png/16px-Coin8.png) would be interesting, because it's less obvious if you should buy a Province or not. But I feel like it should still make you earn your +buys with other cards to at least some extent. Maybe the event itself can give +2 buys only the first time it is bought.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 16, 2018, 02:29:32 pm
If you just want to make buying a lot of cards worthwhile you could simply cut the extra Buys and merely do a Event that does cost reduction:

$2
+1 Buy
This turn cards cost 1 less, but no less than 0.

If you buy 2 cards it does nothing, if you buy 3 it yields +2, if you buy 4 it yields +6 and so on.
I am still skeptical, there are probably many overpowered combinations if you implement cost reduction as an Event. There is Ferry so DXV probably thought about or tried general cost reduction in Event form for Adventures yet didn't do it for good reasons.


I'll change it so that the base is $3 instead, that way you're breaking even if you buy it thrice (but can be doing better if you have other sources of +buy).
At a base price of $3 the Event behaves like this:

# times you buy the Event - cumulated cost - benefit in Coins - net Coin yield - net Coin yield of Travelling Fair

1 |   3 |  2 | -1 | -2
2 |   7 |  6 | -1 | -4
3 | 12 | 12 |  0 | -6
4 | 18 | 20 |+2 | -8

same stuff with one extra Buy before you buy the Event:

1 |   3 |  3 |  0 | -2
2 |   7 |  8 | +1 | -4
3 | 12 | 15 | +3 | -6
4 | 18 | 24 | +6 | -8

I am still not a fan of free Buys and would advocate to use the $4 base price version as it makes Buys sometimes costly and thus makes the Event more similar to Travelling Fair. But at least this version is less crazy than the $2 monster.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 16, 2018, 02:43:18 pm
The requirement to have $7, $12 etc. in hand to get free buys is nontrivial, it's definitely not the same thing as T1 Champion for Buys.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 16, 2018, 03:01:50 pm
Situations in which you want to buy 3 cards while having less than $7 are rare. Namely piling or only 3 $2s.
Situations in which you buy more than 3 cards are pretty rare beyond endgame megaturns.
So I don't see the supposed general lack of a free lunch in the current version. As I showed above, the most you ever net pay is 1. Which is OK I guess, if you only buy one extra card the Event still competes with Travelling Fair.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 16, 2018, 03:03:00 pm
The requirement to have $7, $12 etc. in hand to get free buys is nontrivial, it's definitely not the same thing as T1 Champion for Buys.

Well the exception of buying $0 cost cards was already given. Other than that, it is the same... buying 5 cards that don't cost zero has always had a requirement of having at least $5. Usually at least $10.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 16, 2018, 04:54:07 pm

Renovate

This doesn't need the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/8/81/Debt.png/18px-Debt.png)? in the cost, the on-buy effect works on its own.


Hmmm, well I guess it isn't a good entry for this one then.  I kinda like the card still though.  Now to think of a way to give it a real variable cost....
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 16, 2018, 05:51:50 pm
I did not add the "During your turn" bit, though, because I want the cost to be the same for all players at all times.

You need that clause there to determine the timing, and with that clause, it would affect all the copies of Rare Earth, even those owned by other players. See Peddler.

Gotcha. Here we go:

(https://i.imgur.com/0yp75nfl.png)

Quote
Rare Earth
Treasure - $6*
--
When you play this, choose one: +$1 and gain a Rare Earth; or return this to the Supply for +$1 equal to its cost in $.
-
During your turn, this costs $1 less for every two copies of Rare Earth in the Supply (round down).
[\quote]
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 16, 2018, 07:31:18 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/BVFYm46.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on October 16, 2018, 07:50:54 pm
Hmm this was going to be my entrant this week but it looks like faust beat me to it with the Artifact thing. I also get the feeling that people will prefer faust's anyway because this is kind of a lazy design...
 (https://i.imgur.com/n1dYSJM.png) (https://i.imgur.com/tTGzsdJ.png)

I'll use this instead because it maybe has some shock-factor:
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 16, 2018, 08:37:54 pm
I'll use this instead because it maybe has some shock-factor:
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)

I really like Highland, but I can't wait for people to trash on this! Maybe it's all my pent-up rage from failing to make a decent Great Hall variant. :P

At first glance though I can this working. Hard to actually tell without playtesting though. Excited to see if this works!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 16, 2018, 09:49:36 pm
Hmm this was going to be my entrant this week but it looks like faust beat me to it with the Artifact thing. I also get the feeling that people will prefer faust's anyway because this is kind of a lazy design...
 (https://i.imgur.com/n1dYSJM.png) (https://i.imgur.com/tTGzsdJ.png)
No lazier looking than Flag Bearer. I actually like it, though it is very simple.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 16, 2018, 11:10:48 pm
https://i.imgur.com/KMtpb08.jpg

Dragon痴 hoard

I finally figured out how to post to imgur, however the link is the only way I am able to show you the card. I hope this is good enough for you guys.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 16, 2018, 11:20:01 pm
https://i.imgur.com/KMtpb08.jpg

Dragon痴 hoard

I finally figured out how to post to imgur, however the link is the only way I am able to show you the card. I hope this is good enough for you guys.

Surround the link with these tags: [ img width=200][ /img] (remove the spaces), and that will let it show. Like this:

[ img width=200]https://i.imgur.com/KMtpb08.jpg[ /img]

Without the spaces, it becomes this:

(https://i.imgur.com/KMtpb08.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: vishwathg on October 16, 2018, 11:32:44 pm
https://i.imgur.com/KMtpb08.jpg

Dragon痴 hoard

I finally figured out how to post to imgur, however the link is the only way I am able to show you the card. I hope this is good enough for you guys.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the dividing line shouldn't be there?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 16, 2018, 11:45:37 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/GdYUXUR.jpg)

I知 not sure what you mean I just did it like you did but obviously nothing happened. It only removed the link. I知 doing this with an ipad maybe I can稚 do it with an iPad.
Here痴 the image without the line.
https://i.imgur.com/GdYUXUR.jpg

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 17, 2018, 01:07:43 am
[ img width=200]https://i.imgur.com/GdYUXUR.jpg[ /img]

I知 not sure what you mean I just did it like you did but obviously nothing happened. It only removed the link. I知 doing this with an ipad maybe I can稚 do it with an iPad.
Here痴 the image without the line.
https://i.imgur.com/GdYUXUR.jpg
You need to lose the spaces before img and /img, as Tejayes already noted.

Also I am not sure how this fulfills the condition for this week's contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 17, 2018, 02:34:51 am
I agree with faust - I did intend for the definition to be fairly broad and I'm really happy with the ways it's been interpreted, but just having a combined coin+debt cost isn't quite what I had in mind.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 17, 2018, 03:03:52 am
I noticed other cards that were coin and debt token. And thought those were allowed too. You should of been more precise. And I was kinda bummed that I missed the last 2 contests. It took me a week just to get it to work with imgur. I知 kinda a slow learner when it comes to tech.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 17, 2018, 03:05:53 am
Ah finally man it痴 annoying I値l have to type that in every time though
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 17, 2018, 03:36:52 am
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)
I like this far more than the 3/5 Peddler and don't think that it is shocking at all, it looks pretty balanced. Arguably bonkers with Ironworks but if you played two Actions before Ironworks it is ungainable.
I also think that Great Hall was a niche card whereas Mill is something you often get for the DoubleOasis effect and not for the VPs so double the VPs on a cantrip shouldn't be totally crazy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 17, 2018, 04:51:17 am
I noticed other cards that were coin and debt token. And thought those were allowed too. You should of been more precise. And I was kinda bummed that I missed the last 2 contests. It took me a week just to get it to work with imgur. I知 kinda a slow learner when it comes to tech.

The fact that your card shares a trait with some of the other submitted cards doesn't mean that it satisfies the same restrictions. Debt costs are allowed, but it doesn't automatically make a card have a varied cost, which was the challenge.
Outskirts for instance has a varied cost because you can either buy it for 5$ and 5 debt, or for 5$ and an Action card from your hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 17, 2018, 07:07:24 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zwCAFxZ.jpg)

For those who are unfamiliar with it, the Season mechanic (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14570.0) is by Asper and Cookielord.
I already play around with the basic idea for some time. The card is strictly weaker than Village and could be made more exciting via exchanging Actions for Villagers but that felt to me like too much is going on.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 17, 2018, 08:37:34 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zwCAFxZ.jpg)

For those who are unfamiliar with it, the Season mechanic (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14570.0) is by Asper and Cookielord.
I already play around with the basic idea for some time. The card is strictly weaker than Village and could be made more exciting via exchanging Actions for Villagers but that felt to me like too much is going on.

I appreciate you linking to the thread :)
This goes very well with the Seasons spirit, I think! Not only can you buy it really cheap when it's not useful yet, you can even Remodel it into a Province in the endgame, which makes the Winter part significant, too. Very neat!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on October 17, 2018, 11:19:26 am
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)
I see some people thinking, isn't this an automatic buy for the first turns? Just don't play any until they're all gone. In 2 player games at least, if one player did this whilst the other builds up for later, by turn 6 they're 2 Provinces ahead. It'll be down to how often the building up for later is viable as to how interesting this is.
If it is a problem, increasing the base cost would make the Coppers more important.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 17, 2018, 11:22:22 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zwCAFxZ.jpg)

For those who are unfamiliar with it, the Season mechanic (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14570.0) is by Asper and Cookielord.
I already play around with the basic idea for some time. The card is strictly weaker than Village and could be made more exciting via exchanging Actions for Villagers but that felt to me like too much is going on.
Cool! I don't really like the Season mechanic myself, because you need to track it with a board or something and you can forget, or something, also the cards are usually wordier. That being said, some of the coolest fan cards I've seen are Seasons. I really like this idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on October 17, 2018, 11:35:40 am
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)
I see some people thinking, isn't this an automatic buy for the first turns? Just don't play any until they're all gone. In 2 player games at least, if one player did this whilst the other builds up for later, by turn 6 they're 2 Provinces ahead. It'll be down to how often the building up for later is viable as to how interesting this is.
If it is a problem, increasing the base cost would make the Coppers more important.

The way I see it is taking Baths points over buying a good card for your deck early is almost never worth it, so I doubt going for these would be any better.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 17, 2018, 12:54:02 pm
Cool! I don't really like the Season mechanic myself, because you need to track it with a board or something and you can forget, or something, also the cards are usually wordier. That being said, some of the coolest fan cards I've seen are Seasons. I really like this idea.
It's true that forgetting to move the token is an issue. This is actually something that would work better in a hypothetical online implementation.
Seasons also has the risk of cards getting wordier if you insist on making it do something specific per Season. Sojourner and Student show that (they are still worth it, I think). In general it's better to just check for a true/false, like on Snow Witch, Sanitarium or Plantation, or to have the same value scale, like with Cottage, Timberland, Restore or, well, Viking Village.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 17, 2018, 06:13:58 pm
I'll use this instead because it maybe has some shock-factor:
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)

This card is crazy with Pouch, Travelling Fair and other easy-to-get +Buy stuff. And it is even more crazy in an engine with Salvager or Forge. This card’s price needs an upper limit and the it should at least cost $2 (in Vanilla Big Money it is strictly better than Estate, however).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 17, 2018, 06:56:16 pm
CHALLENGE #4 - VARIABLE COST CARD

Not sure what Cost display more successfully shows that there are two different cost to this card. The first certainly works, but having the visual cue of both cost seems neat. The card instructions are the same.

(https://i.imgur.com/4rM85zx.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/Z8LIhNW.jpg)
Very interesting. I think the 4* one is better. Also, costs.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 17, 2018, 10:45:23 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/LOkHAsk.jpg)

Can I have a redo then.
Does this at least meet the requirements.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 17, 2018, 11:52:37 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/4rM85zx.jpg)
This variable cost doesn't work. Gaining the card happens after you buy it, so you can't buy it for $2 in the first two turns, and after it's in your deck, there's no record of when you bought it (no way to tell apart a Lumber Camp you bought turn 1 from a Lumber Camp you bought turn 6).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 18, 2018, 03:18:58 am
I'll use this instead because it maybe has some shock-factor:
(https://i.imgur.com/vQc0Fs0.png)

This card is crazy with Pouch, Travelling Fair and other easy-to-get +Buy stuff. And it is even more crazy in an engine with Salvager or Forge. This card痴 price needs an upper limit and the it should at least cost $2 (in Vanilla Big Money it is strictly better than Estate, however).
I disagree. Salvager is indeed a strong combo but with Forge you can "overshoot", i.e. you have 5 or more Actions in play so Forging Highland leads to nirvana. Not to mention the opportunity cost of having to buy cantrips instead of stuff that is useful for you early in the game. So I guess that something like Forging Magpies or Fortresses is easier to pull off.

While this card is indeed better in money decks (is that such a bad thing?) you can only get so many for a cheap price (unless you don't play Highlands when you draw them which seems highly dubious), i.e. there is an inherent self-balance in the design.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 18, 2018, 04:01:40 am
I disagree. Salvager is indeed a strong combo but with Forge you can "overshoot", i.e. you have 5 or more Actions in play so Forging Highland leads to nirvana. Not to mention the opportunity cost of having to buy cantrips instead of stuff that is useful for you early in the game. So I guess that something like Forging Magpies or Fortresses is easier to pull off.
I would at least be somewhat worried about decks where you can gain this early in your turn and trash it late, it may get too ridiculous if you Ironworks this with your second action and Salvage/Bishop it with your 20th.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 18, 2018, 04:40:38 am
(https://i.imgur.com/4rM85zx.jpg)
This variable cost doesn't work. Gaining the card happens after you buy it, so you can't buy it for $2 in the first two turns, and after it's in your deck, there's no record of when you bought it (no way to tell apart a Lumber Camp you bought turn 1 from a Lumber Camp you bought turn 6).

This should address both of the issues you brought up. Thanks for the heads up. Not sure I really like this card, so I may scrap it or toy with it more in the next few days.

(https://i.imgur.com/qg3pKOa.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 18, 2018, 07:35:05 am
(https://i.imgur.com/4rM85zx.jpg)
This variable cost doesn't work. Gaining the card happens after you buy it, so you can't buy it for $2 in the first two turns, and after it's in your deck, there's no record of when you bought it (no way to tell apart a Lumber Camp you bought turn 1 from a Lumber Camp you bought turn 6).

This should address both of the issues you brought up. Thanks for the heads up. Not sure I really like this card, so I may scrap it or toy with it more in the next few days.

(https://i.imgur.com/qg3pKOa.jpg)
But what if Ferry is in the kingdom?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 18, 2018, 08:26:40 am
But what if Ferry is in the kingdom?

Then you'll think twice what you'll do with that token.

What I don't like is that the on-gain effect is hugely anti-synergetic. You can either buy this card after your opening, where there's a big chance that it will fail, OR you buy it in the opening, where you will still have to buy it for 4$, but then it starts costing 2$, effectively making it a Woodcutter... Unless you go for a treasure-based strategy, which means this becomes a cheap Big-Money supporter.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 18, 2018, 08:44:33 am
It should also be clarified if you still get the effect when it's tied for most expensive, that will have a pretty big impact on power level.

I actually like the anti-synergy. You can get it early for the economy boost, but it will crumble later, or you wait and end up with a more powerful card. The only thing that bothers me is that it is usually not a very interesting decision whether to go for it later; with cheap engine components you do, otherwise you don't (unless you need a Ruined Market). But maybe the interesting decision in the opening makes up for that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on October 18, 2018, 11:50:38 am
This should address both of the issues you brought up. Thanks for the heads up. Not sure I really like this card, so I may scrap it or toy with it more in the next few days.

(https://i.imgur.com/qg3pKOa.jpg)
But what if Ferry is in the kingdom?
How about this wording:
"While you have gained fewer than two other cards this game (including other copies of Lumber Camp), this costs $2 less (but not less than $0)."
That should match the spirit of the card without creating too many rules issues (there may be rare timing-based complexities with dual gainers, e.g., Stonemason, but I don't think those are any worse than you'd find in an official card).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 18, 2018, 12:03:32 pm
Man, then we can just say "If it is one of your first two turns this game, this costs 2$ less (but not less than 0$).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 18, 2018, 12:07:34 pm
This should address both of the issues you brought up. Thanks for the heads up. Not sure I really like this card, so I may scrap it or toy with it more in the next few days.

(https://i.imgur.com/qg3pKOa.jpg)
But what if Ferry is in the kingdom?
How about this wording:
"While you have gained fewer than two other cards this game (including other copies of Lumber Camp), this costs $2 less (but not less than $0)."
That should match the spirit of the card without creating too many rules issues (there may be rare timing-based complexities with dual gainers, e.g., Stonemason, but I don't think those are any worse than you'd find in an official card).

I don't think that works... there is nothing other than memory telling you how many cards you have gained this game.

This reminds me of my Swamp (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=11495.0) card from a while ago; various people had various suggestions on how to make the turn-tracking work.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on October 18, 2018, 12:10:06 pm
Martyr, Action-Reaction, 5$

+2 cards

You may play another Martyr.
Each Martyr costs one less (but not less than 0).

****************
If you trash this: +2actions, +buy

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 18, 2018, 01:44:20 pm
But what if Ferry is in the kingdom?

Then you'll think twice what you'll do with that token.

What I don't like is that the on-gain effect is hugely anti-synergetic. You can either buy this card after your opening, where there's a big chance that it will fail, OR you buy it in the opening, where you will still have to buy it for 4$, but then it starts costing 2$, effectively making it a Woodcutter... Unless you go for a treasure-based strategy, which means this becomes a cheap Big-Money supporter.

I agree. My goal was to have some kind of terminal Action that was a weak $4 cost, but great $2. Something that you likely would not want early, but could use 3-4 copies of late game. A Woodcutter variant with some added effect seemed like a good place to explore, but it hasn't quite come together.

I think I'm going to go back to my original plan to use the bottom-half portion with a Village card. Opening Village is rarely good, but in this case you'll at least have cheap Villages for the rest of the game.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 18, 2018, 01:48:23 pm
It should also be clarified if you still get the effect when it's tied for most expensive, that will have a pretty big impact on power level.

I actually like the anti-synergy. You can get it early for the economy boost, but it will crumble later, or you wait and end up with a more powerful card. The only thing that bothers me is that it is usually not a very interesting decision whether to go for it later; with cheap engine components you do, otherwise you don't (unless you need a Ruined Market). But maybe the interesting decision in the opening makes up for that.

I appreciate the vote of confidence, but I think I'm going to use the "most expensive" card condition on another card. Maybe this could have worked, but I'm just not quite feeling it right now. If you have any similar card ideas I'd love to hear them, but maybe not on this board. I feel bad enough cluttering this area with non-submission chat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 18, 2018, 01:57:37 pm
CHALLENGE #4 - VARIABLE COST CARD RESUBMISSION

(https://i.imgur.com/QQyyrAG.jpg)

This feels a bit similar to Viking Village. Sorry Holunder9!

[EDIT 10/19/18 12:08AM PST] Changed name and image to Sunken City. It's back!!!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 18, 2018, 02:16:04 pm
I think it is only superficially similar. You want to open with Asylum in order to make it cheap whereas Viking Village is cheap when you don't want it yet.
The effect is cool, I like stuff that rewards overdraw. It is in general weaker than Plaza but in an engine Plaza might have no Treasures to discard and you can convert overdrawing into Coins more easily (Mill does this best but it is also just a cantrip).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 18, 2018, 03:50:20 pm
Perhaps something like this:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  This card costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse still set aside in this way, to a minimum of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).  When you buy this card, return a set-aside Curse to the supply for each (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) that its price has been reduced by in this way.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside curses.

It's still pretty messy - I'm not happy with the "for each $1 that its price has been reduced by in this way" part, but I don't see how else to make it play properly with Bridge and friends.

Maybe I've been overthinking this.  How about:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  You may pay for this card by returning set-aside Curses, with each paying for $1 of its cost.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside Curses.

That even feels like it might fit on a card.  Though then maybe this isn't a card for this contest - it's an alternative payment, not an alternative cost.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: ConMan on October 18, 2018, 06:30:11 pm
That even feels like it might fit on a card.  Though then maybe this isn't a card for this contest - it's an alternative payment, not an alternative cost.
I'm ok with it. It's still in a pretty broad way the same kind of thing.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread {Design a card with variable cost.}
Post by: Kudasai on October 18, 2018, 06:59:52 pm
Perhaps something like this:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  This card costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse still set aside in this way, to a minimum of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).  When you buy this card, return a set-aside Curse to the supply for each (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) that its price has been reduced by in this way.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside curses.

It's still pretty messy - I'm not happy with the "for each $1 that its price has been reduced by in this way" part, but I don't see how else to make it play properly with Bridge and friends.

Maybe I've been overthinking this.  How about:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  You may pay for this card by returning set-aside Curses, with each paying for $1 of its cost.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside Curses.

That even feels like it might fit on a card.  Though then maybe this isn't a card for this contest - it's an alternative payment, not an alternative cost.

Perhaps something like this:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  This card costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) less for each Curse still set aside in this way, to a minimum of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).  When you buy this card, return a set-aside Curse to the supply for each (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) that its price has been reduced by in this way.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside curses.

It's still pretty messy - I'm not happy with the "for each $1 that its price has been reduced by in this way" part, but I don't see how else to make it play properly with Bridge and friends.

Maybe I've been overthinking this.  How about:

Quote
In games using this, at the start of your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and set aside any number of Curses from your discard pile or your hand.  You may pay for this card by returning set-aside Curses, with each paying for $1 of its cost.  At the end of your Buy phase, discard any remaining set-aside Curses.

That even feels like it might fit on a card.  Though then maybe this isn't a card for this contest - it's an alternative payment, not an alternative cost.

I think you're going to have a tough time finding concise wording that gives you $1 coin per Curse discarded, but you can only use it to buy High Grand Witch. I'd suggest either (1) giving $1 coin that can be used to purchase any cards, or (2) reducing the price of Grand High Witch by $1 coin. The former as you mentioned does not qualify for this competition. You've also expressed concern about having the price reduced and the interaction with +Buys. Cost reduction cards are always going to run this type of risk, so I'd just chop this up as a card interaction and something players need to watch out for.

Beyond that, there are some adjustments you can make to reduce the text length. Here is an example using +$1 coin.

During your Buy phase, you may look through your discard pile and return any number of Curses from it or your hand to the Supply. Then +$1 per Curse you returned.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on October 18, 2018, 09:44:23 pm
Treetop Village
$6 Action

+2 Actions
+1 Card
------
This costs 1 less for each card in your hand, but no less than 0.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 19, 2018, 02:19:10 am
Treetop Village
$7 Action

+2 Actions
+1 Card
------
This costs 1 less for each card in your hand, but no less than 0.
This is a cool idea but the price is too high, I guess 4 or 5 would do.
I also think that the concept would work best on an alt-VP card to guarantee that it actually does something. Sure, it also does something in Kingdoms without trashing, with junking or with extra Buys and no good way to get rid of Coppers. But I nonetheless think that it would be best if the card were to self-synergize with its ability.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 19, 2018, 03:21:01 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zwCAFxZ.jpg)

For those who are unfamiliar with it, the Season mechanic (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14570.0) is by Asper and Cookielord.
I already play around with the basic idea for some time. The card is strictly weaker than Village and could be made more exciting via exchanging Actions for Villagers but that felt to me like too much is going on.

Quite a cool card! I recognize the top part from a concept you were working on a few months ago. It seemed to be lacking something then, but I think this addition of the variable cost brings it all together. Would like to see this played with Remodel!

Also, I'd change the question mark font in the cost to "Times New Roman" if you want it to be in line with official cards.

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 19, 2018, 03:37:46 am
(https://i.imgur.com/TEKUM9X.jpg?1)
First Submission:
$6* Lost Temple
Action-Doom
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
While this is in the Supply, once per turn during your buy phase you may
receive the next Hex. If you do, +1 Buy and this costs $3 less.


"+2 Cards, +1 Action, and +$1" I think is priced around $7.5, so giving this a base price of $6 with the added amount per duplicate you have in play seems about right. Also, given that this card rewards diversity it will keep players who try and spam these in line a bit.

Might be best to keep the price changes restricted to your Buy phase. Otherwise, it might be a nightmare to resolve trash for benefit cards during your Action phase. Not impossible though.

Nice, clean submission! Thanks for sharing this one!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 19, 2018, 03:49:26 am
(https://i.imgur.com/ZDRm3Hi.png)

Clarification: Cost reduction effects such as Bridge and Highway will make General cost fewer Debt during your Buy phase.

Big fan of this one! Having cards on hand and ready to be throne-roomed is powerful, but this takes awhile to build up. The cost change effect is very unique as well. All the benefits of being able to buy this with debt and being able to remodel these into Provinces. I wonder if this concept would apply well to other cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 19, 2018, 02:06:27 pm
I decided to change Outskirts to the less flashy version. Perhaps it has a smaller chance of winning now, but rationally, there is no good reason to stick with the debt cost.

(https://i.imgur.com/jtg4Y9c.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MattLee on October 20, 2018, 12:35:54 am
(http://i68.tinypic.com/20u7haf.png)

Does this work with the rules of the game? Do unused actions disappear when you enter the buy phase?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 20, 2018, 01:26:05 am
They do not disappear. (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Diadem)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 20, 2018, 07:39:32 am
(https://i.imgur.com/TEKUM9X.jpg?1)
First Submission:
$6* Lost Temple
Action-Doom
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
While this is in the Supply, once per turn during your buy phase you may
receive the next Hex. If you do, +1 Buy and this costs $3 less.


"+2 Cards, +1 Action, and +$1" I think is priced around $7.5, so giving this a base price of $6 with the added amount per duplicate you have in play seems about right. Also, given that this card rewards diversity it will keep players who try and spam these in line a bit.

Might be best to keep the price changes restricted to your Buy phase. Otherwise, it might be a nightmare to resolve trash for benefit cards during your Action phase. Not impossible though.

Nice, clean submission! Thanks for sharing this one!

Thanks, fixed. My wording seemed a bit short.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 20, 2018, 07:56:47 am
(https://i.imgur.com/TEKUM9X.jpg?1)
First Submission:
$6* Lost Temple
Action-Doom
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
While this is in the Supply, once per turn during your buy phase you may
receive the next Hex. If you do, +1 Buy and this costs $3 less.


"+2 Cards, +1 Action, and +$1" I think is priced around $7.5, so giving this a base price of $6 with the added amount per duplicate you have in play seems about right. Also, given that this card rewards diversity it will keep players who try and spam these in line a bit.

Might be best to keep the price changes restricted to your Buy phase. Otherwise, it might be a nightmare to resolve trash for benefit cards during your Action phase. Not impossible though.

Nice, clean submission! Thanks for sharing this one!

Thanks, fixed. My wording seemed a bit short.

Do you want it per card or per differently named card?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 20, 2018, 08:22:13 am
(https://i.imgur.com/TEKUM9X.jpg?1)
First Submission:
$6* Lost Temple
Action-Doom
+2 Cards
+2 Actions
While this is in the Supply, once per turn during your buy phase you may
receive the next Hex. If you do, +1 Buy and this costs $3 less.


"+2 Cards, +1 Action, and +$1" I think is priced around $7.5, so giving this a base price of $6 with the added amount per duplicate you have in play seems about right. Also, given that this card rewards diversity it will keep players who try and spam these in line a bit.

Might be best to keep the price changes restricted to your Buy phase. Otherwise, it might be a nightmare to resolve trash for benefit cards during your Action phase. Not impossible though.

Nice, clean submission! Thanks for sharing this one!

Thanks, fixed. My wording seemed a bit short.

Do you want it per card or per differently named card?
Differently named card, thanks.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 20, 2018, 03:00:58 pm
(http://i68.tinypic.com/20u7haf.png)

Does this work with the rules of the game? Do unused actions disappear when you enter the buy phase?

I think it's too strong. I would price it at $7 even if it was just +2 Cards and +2 Actions, with no other bonuses.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on October 21, 2018, 08:09:58 am
(http://i68.tinypic.com/20u7haf.png)

Does this work with the rules of the game? Do unused actions disappear when you enter the buy phase?

I think it's too strong. I would price it at $7 even if it was just +2 Cards and +2 Actions, with no other bonuses.
I agree with this, currently the card kind of does everything you need for it giving draw and +buy (as well as a village of course) so I think it'd be more interesting if you had to put in a little more work to get some +buy. I like the idea of the card though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 21, 2018, 06:35:32 pm
There are some really strong entrants, and I'm going to have to go through them all and work out which one I like the most. So I haven't forgotten, but I might take a while.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 21, 2018, 11:54:19 pm
Ok, I think I'm ready. I have to reiterate - there were some really interesting cards that came out of this challenge. I am not a good judge of balance, so I made my pick on a few criteria: (1) did the alternative cost make sense, and add something interesting to the game, (2) did the card as a whole make sense to me, and (3) did the card sit in my "sweet spot" of complexity?

On that basis, I will first name a couple of runners up:

Sunken Village, by Kudasai
Outskirts, by Asper
Royal Retreat, by Aquila

But my final winner is a card that I would love to play with, despite some slight tracking issues, because it seems to create a cool interactive minigame:

Rare Earth, by Tejayes

Congratulations!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 22, 2018, 02:06:18 am
Ok, I think I'm ready. I have to reiterate - there were some really interesting cards that came out of this challenge. I am not a good judge of balance, so I made my pick on a few criteria: (1) did the alternative cost make sense, and add something interesting to the game, (2) did the card as a whole make sense to me, and (3) did the card sit in my "sweet spot" of complexity?

On that basis, I will first name a couple of runners up:

Sunken Village, by Kudasai
Outskirts, by Asper
Royal Retreat, by Aquila

But my final winner is a card that I would love to play with, despite some slight tracking issues, because it seems to create a cool interactive minigame:

Rare Earth, by Tejayes

Congratulations!

Thank you so much, ConMan! And now...

CHALLENGE #5: NEW TYPE OF SPENDABLE TOKEN

This is a two-fold challenge. First, create a new use for the standard coin tokens used for Coffers and Villagers. Give it a name, describe when you can spend these tokens, and describe what happens when each token is spent. Second, create at least one card (up to three) that allows for gaining these tokens.

The best combination of token and card will be the winner. If your token is similar to a previously-submitted token, that's fine; just give it a different name at the very least.

If there are any questions about the parameters of this challenge, please ask away.

Edit: Changed rules to allow entrants to design up to three cards that all gain the same new token.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 22, 2018, 02:40:21 am
Introducing the tokentoken. The tokentokens are any-token tokens. You may spend a tokentoken whenever you may spend any other token to get +1VP, +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) (like coffers), +1 action (like villagers), +1 card (we know that someone will make a +1 card token for this contest), add a token to the trade route mat (that counts for your trade routes only), or get the effect of any other token, except the adventures tokens (obviously).

Quote
Jabberwock
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) - Action - Attack - Reaction - Jubjub bird
Take 2 tokentokens. Each other player loses a tokentoken. If they don't, snicker-snack, they gain a curse.
-
When another player spends a tokentoken, you may trash any number of cards from your hand. For each card you trash this way, take a tokentoken.
-
When you trash this card, discard it and take a tokentoken, unless you trashed it with a vorpal blade.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 22, 2018, 02:45:25 am
Marketeers are Buy tokens, i.e. you can use them during your Buy phase for +1 Buy.

(https://i.imgur.com/38jvSYi.jpg)

Man, there are some tough guys in the streets, they can easily handle enemy Pirates and Bandits.

Beyond stuff like this happening beyond your turn, worst case is getting the Marketeer at the end of the turn, best case is something like sifting through the card several times per turn. Perhaps this is too weak and could get away with +2 Marketeers.

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 22, 2018, 02:53:03 am
Are Events allowed, or just cards?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 22, 2018, 02:53:51 am
Marketeers are Buy tokens, i.e. you can use them during your Buy phase for +1 Buy.

(https://i.imgur.com/SIkTIK6.jpg)

Man, there are some tough guys in the streets, they can easily handle enemy Pirates and Bandits.

Beyond stuff like this happening beyond your turn, worst case is getting the Marketeer at the end of the turn, best case is something like sifting through the card several times per turn. Perhaps this is too weak and could get away with +2 Marketeers.

Is being able to gain the whole pile when you buy just one of them intentional?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 22, 2018, 02:59:44 am
Is being able to gain the whole pile when you buy just one of them intentional?
No, such pile driving would be bad. Thanks for the catch, I changed it to on-buy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2018, 04:10:45 am
My best bet are Trade Tokens, as introduced in LastFootnote's Enterprise expansion. I'd probably call them something different (because of "Trade" being commonly associated with gaining Silvers), but their catch is that they don't do something specific, but each card tells you what to do with them. In the case of Enterprise, he used that to create lots of one-shot type effects.

My try at such a card back in the day was Sheriff, but I can't think of another clever Trade Token type card right now. Maybe later.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 22, 2018, 08:22:13 am
Is it okay to use a modification of someone else's mechanic? Like can I use a variation on Gazbag's Freeze/Ice token mechanic?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 22, 2018, 09:35:00 am
Are Events allowed, or just cards?

Events are allowed. Landmarks are allowed. Projects are allowed. Cards with Artifacts are allowed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2018, 09:39:19 am
I did not add the "During your turn" bit, though, because I want the cost to be the same for all players at all times.

You need that clause there to determine the timing, and with that clause, it would affect all the copies of Rare Earth, even those owned by other players. See Peddler.

So, this is much too late a reply, but:
I think this doesn't make a difference here, because unlike Peddler, the value is the same for all players anyhow.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 22, 2018, 09:44:05 am
Is it okay to use a modification of someone else's mechanic? Like can I use a variation on Gazbag's Freeze/Ice token mechanic?

As long as it's not an exact copy of the mechanic, go for it. If the token effect is pretty expected (like a +Buy token or a +Card token) and someone has already used it, I'll accept a submission with the same token type as long as the name is different.

Remember, this is about the token/card combo. If everyone submitted a card that gains Card-drawing tokens, I'd be fine with that as long as the cards are different and the names of the tokens are different.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on October 22, 2018, 10:47:13 am
'Gaining spendable tokens' is loose here, but:

(https://i.imgur.com/1IL8hZP.jpg)
You gain the (poorly named) Tool tokens just by this being in the game, then spend them at the start. 3 tokens for each player, in their colour like with Adventures tokens/chits. This has a few awkward things about it (like buying a Tool-ed card and the drawn things be unusable), so I may revise this later, but I'll keep the names.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2018, 11:12:25 am
(https://i.imgur.com/PplQFFv.png)

As announced, basically LF's Trade tokens (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2114.0). What can I say? They're great. You could have this be a different token per card that uses it to dodge "re-using" Trade Tokens, but firstly, having it one kind of token (whatever named) opens additional interactions (similar to how several cards use the Journey token), and secondly, it depends on the individual cards anyhow.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 22, 2018, 11:27:55 am
My best bet are Trade Tokens, as introduced in LastFootnote's Enterprise expansion. I'd probably call them something different (because of "Trade" being commonly associated with gaining Silvers), but their catch is that they don't do something specific, but each card tells you what to do with them. In the case of Enterprise, he used that to create lots of one-shot type effects.

My try at such a card back in the day was Sheriff, but I can't think of another clever Trade Token type card right now. Maybe later.
Since we are only designing a single card for our token, any concept we have is basically a Trade token. Any card in this contest may be phrased as gaining Trade tokens with the additional text on the card "in games using this, Trade tokens do XY".
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2018, 12:51:04 pm
My best bet are Trade Tokens, as introduced in LastFootnote's Enterprise expansion. I'd probably call them something different (because of "Trade" being commonly associated with gaining Silvers), but their catch is that they don't do something specific, but each card tells you what to do with them. In the case of Enterprise, he used that to create lots of one-shot type effects.

My try at such a card back in the day was Sheriff, but I can't think of another clever Trade Token type card right now. Maybe later.
Since we are only designing a single card for our token, any concept we have is basically a Trade token. Any card in this contest may be phrased as gaining Trade tokens with the additional text on the card "in games using this, Trade tokens do XY".
Sure, but we were also asked to explain the concept behind the token AND that it should use physical coin tokens.

For first edition's Guilds alone, getting that coin token for non-Coffers-purposes without a mat seems ill-advised, and if you are going to get a mat anyhow, conceptually, you would rather have it ready for use with several cards. While this is implicitly the case for Marketeers or Freeze tokens, it's certainly worth an explicit note for context-dependent usage. So yeah, it's about explaining the concept, dude.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Watno on October 22, 2018, 01:45:34 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/gaQPnlK.jpg)

Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 22, 2018, 02:07:22 pm
My best bet are Trade Tokens, as introduced in LastFootnote's Enterprise expansion. I'd probably call them something different (because of "Trade" being commonly associated with gaining Silvers), but their catch is that they don't do something specific, but each card tells you what to do with them. In the case of Enterprise, he used that to create lots of one-shot type effects.

My try at such a card back in the day was Sheriff, but I can't think of another clever Trade Token type card right now. Maybe later.
Since we are only designing a single card for our token, any concept we have is basically a Trade token. Any card in this contest may be phrased as gaining Trade tokens with the additional text on the card "in games using this, Trade tokens do XY".

My goal with this theme was that you would create a token that can be gained by multiple cards, even though you are only designing a single card. It's as if your entry was Coffers and you presented Candlestick Maker as your card. It fits the theme of the challenge while also opening up the possibility for more cards to use this token mechanic.

If it helps, I'll allow for entrants to create up to three cards that gain your created token. That way, if multiple people want to use a Card-drawing token, for example, they can each enter a completely different set of cards that gain these tokens. I'll add this to the original challenge post.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 22, 2018, 02:19:02 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/gaQPnlK.jpg)

Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Without wanting to diss your simple and good design, in my opinion Drawers are the most dubious of the three vanilla tokens as draw is something you rarely want to save. Early in the game cycling is very strong so the main strategic application of them is probably in the endgame, e.g. to set up a megaturn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 22, 2018, 02:22:37 pm
I guess I didn't quite understand the challenge till now. So the tokens need to be spent for something? Not just cards that use a new type of token?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Watno on October 22, 2018, 02:36:15 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/gaQPnlK.jpg)

Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Without wanting to diss your simple and good design, in my opinion Drawers are the most dubious of the three vanilla tokens as draw is something you rarely want to save. Early in the game cycling is very strong so the main strategic application of them is probably in the endgame, e.g. to set up a megaturn.

No worries, I mainly made it for the pun.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 22, 2018, 02:47:14 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/gaQPnlK.jpg)

Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Without wanting to diss your simple and good design, in my opinion Drawers are the most dubious of the three vanilla tokens as draw is something you rarely want to save. Early in the game cycling is very strong so the main strategic application of them is probably in the endgame, e.g. to set up a megaturn.

No worries, I mainly made it for the pun.
Lol I didn't know if you had tried that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 22, 2018, 04:38:04 pm
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 22, 2018, 05:02:31 pm
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
Yeah, if they need to be 'spent,' not just serve a certain function, I might also.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 22, 2018, 05:17:14 pm
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
Just make your +1 Pizza from Road a spendable token. When you have 6 or whatever number Pizza tokens, message Asper for your free pizza! :P ;D
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on October 22, 2018, 05:26:34 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/gaQPnlK.jpg)

Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Without wanting to diss your simple and good design, in my opinion Drawers are the most dubious of the three vanilla tokens as draw is something you rarely want to save. Early in the game cycling is very strong so the main strategic application of them is probably in the endgame, e.g. to set up a megaturn.

Getting non-terminal draw at the start of your next turn could often be better than terminal draw this turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on October 22, 2018, 06:23:43 pm
Introducing the tokentoken. The tokentokens are any-token tokens. You may spend a tokentoken whenever you may spend any other token to get +1VP, +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) (like coffers), +1 action (like villagers), +1 card (we know that someone will make a +1 card token for this contest), add a token to the trade route mat (that counts for your trade routes only), or get the effect of any other token, except the adventures tokens (obviously).

Quote
Jabberwock
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) - Action - Attack - Reaction - Jubjub bird
Take 2 tokentokens. Each other player loses a tokentoken. If they don't, snicker-snack, they gain a curse.
-
When another player spends a tokentoken, you may trash any number of cards from your hand. For each card you trash this way, take a tokentoken.
-
When you trash this card, discard it and take a tokentoken, unless you trashed it with a vorpal blade.
I feel like this is just a token effort.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 22, 2018, 06:27:53 pm
Getting non-terminal draw at the start of your next turn could often be better than terminal draw this turn.
True that but how many Villagers are living in these Fishing Villages? For next turn stuff you don't need tokens, stuff like Gear and Enchantress suffice.
Unlike with all the other vanilla tokens which are sometimes accumulated you will only save Card tokens for tactical reasons during build-up. Once you got something decent running saving a huge bunch can be good for huge turns.

That's simple due to basic asymmetries in the game: without extra Buys you can only make so much out of Coffers, without extra Action cards you don't spend a Villager and without enough Coins Marketeers will be idle. But there are usually some cards in your deck and while you still build you want to see those cards relatively quickly to then see your newly bought cards even quicker and so on.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 22, 2018, 10:34:52 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/tC71W06.png)

Endurance tokens:
When you would discard a non-Duration Action card from play, you may instead spend an Endurance token, to keep it in play and resolve its effects again at the start of your next turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MattLee on October 23, 2018, 12:31:15 am
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24d22xf.png)
(Edited to fix a mistake on card)

BOOTLEG TOKENS - Whenever another player gains a card costing up to $4, you may spend a bootleg token to gain a copy of that card. You can only use one bootleg token for each card gained.

The flavor here is that you're paying the bootlegger to steal things for you. The more you pay him, they more he will steal for you.

Its obviously inspired by Smuggler (a personal favorite of mine), except its actually more of a remodeler that you have to wait for and don't have a lot of control over.


Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 23, 2018, 12:38:18 am
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
Just make your +1 Pizza from Road a spendable token. When you have 6 or whatever number Pizza tokens, message Asper for your free pizza! :P ;D

Psst! The less people know this, the better.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 23, 2018, 01:01:00 am
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
Yeah me too. I don't think think there are interesting enough things left to do with this.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 23, 2018, 01:02:06 am
(http://i63.tinypic.com/2movz0g.png)

BOOTLEG TOKENS - Whenever another player gains a card costing up to $4, you may spend a bootleg token to gain a copy of that card. You can only use one bootleg token for each card gained.

The flavor here is that you're paying the bootlegger to steal things for you. The more you pay him, they more he will steal for you.

Its obviously inspired by Smuggler (a personal favorite of mine), except its actually more of a remodeler that you have to wait for and don't have a lot of control over.

Problem: How does this interact with Treasures that give variable $ such as Bank or Philosopher's Stone? You have to play them to calculate their value, so would they give no Bootleg tokens at all?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 23, 2018, 01:06:56 am
(https://i.imgur.com/cwJR5qs.png)
(a (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Sellsail&description=%2B2%20Cards%0A%2B1%20Action%0A%2B2%20Mutineers&type=Action&credit=Illustration%3A%20nachomolina&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Forig00.deviantart.net%2F7cd1%2Ff%2F2010%2F263%2Fd%2F0%2Fsalladhar__s_crew_by_nachomolina-d2z412n.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0) b (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Grotto&description=%2B%20%242%0AEach%20other%20player%0Agains%20a%20Mutineer.%0A%0A-%0A%0AWhen%20you%20discard%20this%20other%20than%20during%20Clean-up%2C%20you%20may%20reveal%20it%20to%20gain%20a%20Silver.&type=Action%20-%20Attack%20-%20Reaction&credit=Illustration%3A%20David%20Teniers%20the%20Younger&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.com%2Fimages-medium-large-5%2Fvista-from-a-grotto-flemish-david-teniers-the-younger.jpg&color0=3&color1=0&size=0) c (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Diving%20Bell&description=When%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20each%20other%20player%20gains%203%20Mutineers.%0A%0A-%0A%0AUntil%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20when%20you%20spend%20a%20Mutineer%2C%20additionally%20discard%0Aas%20many%20cards%20from%20your%20hand%20as%20you%20have%20remaining%20Mutineers.&type=Project&credit=&price=%245&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fbeoshewulf.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F07%2Falexanders-submersible-with-cat.jpg&color0=15&color1=0&size=1))

Mutineers may be spent during your Action phase at any time when you might spend an action instead, i.e. when no cards are currently resolving. Spending a Mutineer discards a card from your hand. At the end of the game, each unspent Mutineer is worth -1VP.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 23, 2018, 01:12:45 am
Mutineers may be spent during your Action phase at any time when you might spend an action instead, i.e. when no cards are currently resolving. Spending a Mutineer discards a card from your hand. At the end of the game, each unspent Mutineer is worth -1VP.
I think with this rule, I can lose all my Mutineers as soon as I have an empty hand during my Action phase. Is that intentional?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 23, 2018, 01:23:30 am
Spa
Type: Treasure
Cost: $5

When you play this, choose one:

Pay a Spa token for +3 $
or:
Trash a card from your hand for +1 $ and +1 Spa token

--
When you gain this, +1 Spa token
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 23, 2018, 05:45:15 pm
Here goes nothing.
(https://i.imgur.com/wbRb3tg.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/NXJBDZb.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/jBo12jI.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/uASo4Ll.jpg)
Credit to Kudasai for this awesome mat!
I may or may not change one of these cards before the end of the week.
The name/flavor comes from Scheme, which is one of my favorite cards.
Edit: The intention for Slum Market is that the while in play effect affects the card you potentially gain.
Also, sorry for having the same name as Holunder9's Slum Market.

First version had you discard one plot token per $3 something cost.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 23, 2018, 05:50:00 pm
Here goes nothing. I put my token description into a card format because it was fun.
(https://i.imgur.com/eRghb2T.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/wbRb3tg.jpg?1)
I may or may not post another card before the end of the week.
The name/flavor comes from Scheme, which is one of my favorite cards.

Is Conspiracy strictly better than Scheme? 2 Plot is enough to put a card that costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) or more onto your deck with its own cost-reduction ability. So with the exception of wanting to Scheme a Prince; I think Plot can topdeck anything Scheme could, and it can save tokens for later instead, as well as top-deck Treasure and Night cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 23, 2018, 07:00:57 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/sQfv26i.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/VJ28AVP.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/vLicZ9n.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/VPlCEoj.jpg)

[EDITS]
-Pioneer(v0.2): Cost change from $5 to $6.
-Lumber Camp(v0.2): Gives +1 Stores instead of +2 Stores when gained during your first 2 turns (credit: Asper).
-Pioneer(v0.3): Cost change from $6 to $7; Can now trash two cards instead of one.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on October 23, 2018, 08:18:07 pm
<stores>
This is easily my favorite for this week's contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 23, 2018, 08:37:01 pm
Mutineers may be spent during your Action phase at any time when you might spend an action instead, i.e. when no cards are currently resolving. Spending a Mutineer discards a card from your hand. At the end of the game, each unspent Mutineer is worth -1VP.
I think with this rule, I can lose all my Mutineers as soon as I have an empty hand during my Action phase. Is that intentional?
I was concerned that adding a clause "if you have at least one card in hand" might be too precise for the rules of the contest, but looking at them again, I guess it's probably safe to include that part.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 23, 2018, 08:50:17 pm
So, the cards need to provide tokens that are used for the same thing? And they have to be coin tokens (not in player colors)? And they need to be spendable? Uh... In that case, I'm going to sit this one out.
I feel similarly, but I like a challenge.  I figured I'd try to get some variation on +draw tokens to function.  Though frankly, I'm not sure if this was worth all the effort.

Quote
STORAGE
During your Action phase, you may reveal a non-Victory card from hand that costs in coins from $1 to the number of Storage tokens you have. Discard a number of cards (one of which must be the revealed card), remove a number of tokens, and then draw a number of cards each equal to the cost of the revealed card in coins.
E.g. You have 5 Storage tokens, so you may reveal a non-Victory card costing from $1 to $5. You reveal a Silver; you discard the Silver and 2 other cards (3 cards total for Silver's cost of $3); you remove 3 Storage tokens from your mat, 2 remain; and then you draw 3 cards.  You may reveal a non-Victory card costing from $1 to $2 (for your 2 Storage tokens) to do this again (before or after playing Actions).
(https://i.imgur.com/yWzAWh3.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/8CM1KW0.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/5V8oxIL.jpg)
Quote
Cooper
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+3 Cards, +1 Storage. Trash this.
When you gain or trash this, +3 Storage.
Quote
Bartender
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Storage, +$2. Each player (including you) may reveal a Curse from their hand. Each player who does gets +2 Storage. Each other player gains a Curse.
Quote
Barrels
Types: Treasure
Cost: $5
$1, +1 Buy
While this is in play, when you gain a card, +$1 and +Storage equal to the cost of the gained card in coins.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 23, 2018, 09:14:04 pm
Here goes nothing. I put my token description into a card format because it was fun.
(https://i.imgur.com/eRghb2T.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/wbRb3tg.jpg?1)
I may or may not post another card before the end of the week.
The name/flavor comes from Scheme, which is one of my favorite cards.

Is Conspiracy strictly better than Scheme? 2 Plot is enough to put a card that costs (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) or more onto your deck with its own cost-reduction ability. So with the exception of wanting to Scheme a Prince; I think Plot can topdeck anything Scheme could, and it can save tokens for later instead, as well as top-deck Treasure and Night cards.
True. Expect to see Conspiracy changed within a couple of days.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 23, 2018, 09:15:05 pm
Garrison
Type: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: gain a card costing less than it; or take a number of Fort tokens equal to half its cost in coin, rounded down.



When you trash a card, you may spend a Fort token to put the trashed card into your hand.


Edit: Renamed "Fortress token" to "Fort token", due to Fly-Eagles-Fly's suggestion below.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 23, 2018, 09:21:04 pm
Garrison
Type: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: gain a card costing less than it; or take a number of Fortress tokens equal to half its cost in coin, rounded down.



When you trash a card, you may spend a Fortress token to put the trashed card into your hand.
Since Fortress is already a thing, I think you should use a different word. Maybe just Fort? Yes I realize that Fortress tokens make cards have Fortress' when-trash ability, but I still think it's not best to have the token name be the same as the card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 23, 2018, 10:20:10 pm
You spend Luck tokens when you shuffle. For each Luck token spent, set aside a card and then put it on the bottom of the deck after shuffling (in any order if you set aside more than one).

(https://i.imgur.com/7bKcXUC.png)(https://i.imgur.com/l0t7yXd.png)(https://i.imgur.com/L3uBhEM.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 23, 2018, 10:23:24 pm
There's so many new mechanics being invented! I may use some of these in my own cards, crediting and linking to here of course.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 23, 2018, 10:46:07 pm
Garrison
Type: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Choose one: gain a card costing less than it; or take a number of Fortress tokens equal to half its cost in coin, rounded down.



When you trash a card, you may spend a Fortress token to put the trashed card into your hand.
Since Fortress is already a thing, I think you should use a different word. Maybe just Fort? Yes I realize that Fortress tokens make cards have Fortress' when-trash ability, but I still think it's not best to have the token name be the same as the card.

Yeah, I thought about that, but thought it's easier to remember what something does when it shares a name with the official card it's based on. But "Fort" is a clever way to get the best of both worlds. I think I'll edit my post. Thanks for the suggestion!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 23, 2018, 11:26:53 pm
There's so many new mechanics being invented! I may use some of these in my own cards, crediting and linking to here of course.

Exactly what I was hoping for! I'm so excited with all of the entries so far. I can't wait to see what else you all come up with!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MattLee on October 24, 2018, 01:03:09 am
Problem: How does this interact with Treasures that give variable $ such as Bank or Philosopher's Stone? You have to play them to calculate their value, so would they give no Bootleg tokens at all?

You're right, thanks. I changed it to only trashing Coppers, Silvers and Golds. Its the least confusing and least wordy way I could think of to fix it.

(http://i65.tinypic.com/24d22xf.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 24, 2018, 02:14:52 am
These mockups were rushed a bit, so names and artwork may change on some of these.
My main issue with these is that they make greening way too easy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 24, 2018, 02:25:00 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zpfmstq.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/WQqzBYi.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/vLicZ9n.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/Llaal2j.jpg)


These mockups were rushed a bit, so names and artwork may change on some of these.
Great stuff! Now the obvious use is setting aside Victory cards which makes engine player slightly weaker and Alt-VP stronger. Kinda nice to win with a lot of Duchies instead of an exploding engine for a change.
Looters become relatively weaker although it is hard to get enough Stores to withstand a CUltist onslaught.
Pioneer looks like the best defense against Cursers and Storehouse is a non-interactive version of a card like Forager, i.e. you have to get rid of good stuff to build it up.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 24, 2018, 03:18:14 am
<stores>
This is easily my favorite for this week's contest.

I appreciate the vote of confidence. I like others on here was having a hard time figuring out what to do with tokens outside of the vanilla bonus offerings. I'm happy with this Island-esque style token, but it is such a powerful effect that I fear it will make greening too easy. I guess I can always bump the prices on these to make that less of an issue. I can easily see Pioneer costing $6.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 24, 2018, 03:36:48 am
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24d22xf.png)
(Edited to fix a mistake on card)

BOOTLEG TOKENS - Whenever another player gains a card costing up to $4, you may spend a bootleg token to gain a copy of that card. You can only use one bootleg token for each card gained.

The flavor here is that you're paying the bootlegger to steal things for you. The more you pay him, they more he will steal for you.

Its obviously inspired by Smuggler (a personal favorite of mine), except its actually more of a remodeler that you have to wait for and don't have a lot of control over.

Cool token idea! I've always secretly wished for more Smugglers concepts. I know you just made a change so you can only trash Coppers, Silvers, and Golds, but I think I have some wording that would allow you to trash any Treasure. It goes something like this:

"You may trash a Treasure from your hand. +1 Bootleg per $1 it would make if played now."

I'm taking some liberties with the phrasing of this, but it should adhere to what the Dominion rules has to say about playing Treasure cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 24, 2018, 03:46:47 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zpfmstq.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/WQqzBYi.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/vLicZ9n.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/Llaal2j.jpg)


These mockups were rushed a bit, so names and artwork may change on some of these.
Great stuff! Now the obvious use is setting aside Victory cards which makes engine player slightly weaker and Alt-VP stronger. Kinda nice to win with a lot of Duchies instead of an exploding engine for a change.
Looters become relatively weaker although it is hard to get enough Stores to withstand a CUltist onslaught.
Pioneer looks like the best defense against Cursers and Storehouse is a non-interactive version of a card like Forager, i.e. you have to get rid of good stuff to build it up.

Yeah, I'm nervous this alters too much of the game mechanics. I'm not sure if I like that Stores can block attacks. Might change it to cards gained on a player's turn. It could be fine if I end up bumping some of the card costs. Wasting expensive Stores on Ruins and Curses might not be worth it at some card costs. Would appreciate any insights or thoughts you have on Attacks with these.

Thanks for the comments!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 24, 2018, 03:52:59 am
Marketeers are Buy tokens, i.e. you can use them during your Buy phase for +1 Buy.

(https://i.imgur.com/38jvSYi.jpg)

Man, there are some tough guys in the streets, they can easily handle enemy Pirates and Bandits.

Beyond stuff like this happening beyond your turn, worst case is getting the Marketeer at the end of the turn, best case is something like sifting through the card several times per turn. Perhaps this is too weak and could get away with +2 Marketeers.

Interesting! You can open $4/$4 with this on the board if you don't mind the somewhat-dead Slum Market getting in the way. At least you'll have all the +Buys you'll need for those epic 3-pile endings.

Hard to gauge the strength of all these new mechanics, but Slum Market seems fine at +1 Marketeer. This encourages players to get it earlier to amass more +Buys. Giving +2 Marketeers I think would make this aspect trivial.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 24, 2018, 04:56:40 am
Obviously, Drawers are tokens that can be used for +1 card at any point during your turn.
Without wanting to diss your simple and good design, in my opinion Drawers are the most dubious of the three vanilla tokens as draw is something you rarely want to save. Early in the game cycling is very strong so the main strategic application of them is probably in the endgame, e.g. to set up a megaturn.

No worries, I mainly made it for the pun.

My pun was better (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=17235.msg772133#msg772133).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 24, 2018, 05:01:11 am
(https://i.imgur.com/qMhGwWL.jpg)

Quote
Ledger
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
$3
Take @3.  You may trash this.
-
When you gain or trash this, take 2 Creditors

You may spend a Creditor to ignore the effect of Debt when buying one card.

An earlier version of the card lacked "You may trash this."
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 24, 2018, 07:59:17 am
I'll admit, this contest brought more interesting concepts than I would have imagined. I'm going to stay in the watcher's row, but it's interesting to see these.

Stores:
Having experimented with several effects that can keep Victory cards out of your deck (Lady-in-Waiting, Glory), I would like to remark that these abilities can be crazy good and should be balanced with utmost care. Opening two Lumber Camps, for instance, will allow you to gain more than your share of the Provinces before having to worry about them clogging your deck. The thing with all such abilities is that they don't force you to build a stable deck. Any deck that can reliably produce 8$ if left alone will now be able to win. A general concern is, if the Victory gaining is too strong, it might overshadow other aspects of the card. All that said, however, I think Kudasai did a pretty amazing job at balancing these, especially for a first post laying out the concept. I feel most of the things I wrote here have been considered already, but I still felt like pointing them out for others to consider. VP gaining is going to be a huge aspect of these cards, I think.

Luck:
Those are cute, but I'd like them better if they just kept the cards out of the suffle. Actually, that's how I had read them when I started writing this post, and I just now realized I had misread. Such tokens would actually be rather similar to Stores, just a bit more fiddly - but with the added advantage that you have to produce them again and again, so the more cards you want to keep out, the more you need to produce. That diminishes the issue of one Pioneer setting up your uncorruptible engine... They can be used rather similar to Freezing tokens, too, and I like how you added them as a drawback for e.g. Woodland Witch. The balance can probably still be improved on some of these, though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 08:29:56 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yGZEj6n.jpg)

Quote
Ledger
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
$3
Take @3
-
When you gain or trash this, take 2 Creditors

You may spend a Creditor to ignore the effect of Debt when buying one card.
To be clear, this means that you can buy a card when you have debt, not that you can buy a card that has debt in its cost for free, right?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 24, 2018, 08:39:33 am
Quote
Ledger
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
$3
Take @3
-
When you gain or trash this, take 2 Creditors

You may spend a Creditor to ignore the effect of Debt when buying one card.
Looks to me like a half Capital without the extra Buy that you can use twice before it becomes dead. Pretty weak.


Yeah, I'm nervous this alters too much of the game mechanics. I'm not sure if I like that Stores can block attacks. Might change it to cards gained on a player's turn. It could be fine if I end up bumping some of the card costs. Wasting expensive Stores on Ruins and Curses might not be worth it at some card costs. Would appreciate any insights or thoughts you have on Attacks with these.
I'll just comment on Pioneer as I think that the two terminals are unlikely to be overpowered.

Mountebank is probably the most interesting Attack. If you Store a Copper you can use Pioneer as Copper trasher, if you Store a Curse you can use it as Curse trasher. The tricky question is, what do you do when you have set aside a Curse, still have Stores and get Cursed. Do you want to use the Store immediately to increase the draw power of your deck at the cost of permanent -1VP or do you decide to trash it later at the cost of a temporarily clogged deck?
This leads to interesting play around junkers and I wouldn't worry about it.

As Asper has pointed out, greening is the key issue. Pioneer can be read as a cantrip that gains  set aside Laboratories which land in your deck once you green.
That seems prett good, compared to something like Tormentor which is terminal and gains something that is weaker than a Lab under particular conditions (with the only advantage that the Imps is immediately yours).

On the other hand, it does nothing while you do not green yet, it only sets up future drawing power. So it will not shine in engines which want draw power long before greening but in stable money decks. You can e.g. imagine a deck with nothing but Chapel, Pioneer, a Gold, 2 Silvers and a Copper that reliably gains a Province per turn.

So the meta question is, do you want a card that is relatively best for money and Alt-VP decks and don't mind that it is extremly strong under such circumstances or do you want to tone it down some? If the latter is the case, I'd consider not making it a cantrip (I guess it'd be OK if it were non-terminal).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 08:45:17 am
As Asper has pointed out, greening is the key issue. Pioneer can be read as a cantrip that gains  set aside Laboratories which land in your deck once you green.
That seems prett good, compared to something like Tormentor which is terminal and gains something that is weaker than a Lab under particular conditions (with the only advantage that the Imps is immediately yours).
Ummm... I'm sorry, how is Pioneer gaining Laboratories?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 24, 2018, 08:51:28 am
As Asper has pointed out, greening is the key issue. Pioneer can be read as a cantrip that gains  set aside Laboratories which land in your deck once you green.
That seems prett good, compared to something like Tormentor which is terminal and gains something that is weaker than a Lab under particular conditions (with the only advantage that the Imps is immediately yours).
Ummm... I'm sorry, how is Pioneer gaining Laboratories?
I said that it can be read, i.e. interpreted as a cantrip that gains Labs which land in your deck after you gain a Victory card.
A dead card in your deck decreases your draw power by one per shuffle, Lab increases it by one. Spending a Store to set aside a Victory card increases your draw power by one per shuffle as well so it is similar although not identical to having gained a Laboratory.
Island does something similar and it is also compared to Laboratory and discussed in depth in this thread (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12343.0).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 24, 2018, 08:59:01 am
You may spend a Creditor to ignore the effect of Debt when buying one card.
To be clear, this means that you can buy a card when you have debt, not that you can buy a card that has debt in its cost for free, right?

Right.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 24, 2018, 09:01:13 am
Looks to me like a half Capital without the extra Buy that you can use twice before it becomes dead. Pretty weak.

On its own, yes.  In multiples, or with other debt cost cards, maybe you can do more with it.

I did wonder whether it would be better priced at $3.  What do you think?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 09:28:07 am
As Asper has pointed out, greening is the key issue. Pioneer can be read as a cantrip that gains  set aside Laboratories which land in your deck once you green.
That seems prett good, compared to something like Tormentor which is terminal and gains something that is weaker than a Lab under particular conditions (with the only advantage that the Imps is immediately yours).
Ummm... I'm sorry, how is Pioneer gaining Laboratories?
I said that it can be read, i.e. interpreted as a cantrip that gains Labs which land in your deck after you gain a Victory card.
A dead card in your deck decreases your draw power by one per shuffle, Lab increases it by one. Spending a Store to set aside a Victory card increases your draw power by one per shuffle as well so it is similar although not identical to having gained a Laboratory.
Island does something similar and it is also compared to Laboratory and discussed in depth in this thread (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12343.0).
Thanks for the explanation.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 24, 2018, 09:35:42 am
On the other hand, it does nothing while you do not green yet, it only sets up future drawing power. So it will not shine in engines which want draw power long before greening but in stable money decks. You can e.g. imagine a deck with nothing but Chapel, Pioneer, a Gold, 2 Silvers and a Copper that reliably gains a Province per turn.
Note: Like that, the deck you describe is not fully reliable as it is 6 cards and it may be that you don't draw the Pioneer. But still, you can probably get to the proper Golden deck in ~8 turns and that is pretty fast.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 09:53:14 am
I updated the Plot token description so that it makes you discard one plot token per $2, 2 debt, or potion something costs. Making it be $2 instead of $3 should weaken the Tokens, but I like this one better, and it also affects debt and potion cost cards now.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 24, 2018, 10:12:18 am
Fly-Eagles-Fly, regarding your signature, what's FEF?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 10:17:27 am
Fly-Eagles-Fly, regarding your signature, what's FEF?
What some people call me on the chess.com Variants forum. I was just wondering if anyone here also plays games there.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 24, 2018, 12:48:03 pm
Looks to me like a half Capital without the extra Buy that you can use twice before it becomes dead. Pretty weak.

On its own, yes.  In multiples, or with other debt cost cards, maybe you can do more with it.

I did wonder whether it would be better priced at $3.  What do you think?

I've added "You may trash this", so that (a) you can use it more times, and (b) it doesn't become a dead card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 01:03:39 pm
Looks to me like a half Capital without the extra Buy that you can use twice before it becomes dead. Pretty weak.

On its own, yes.  In multiples, or with other debt cost cards, maybe you can do more with it.

I did wonder whether it would be better priced at $3.  What do you think?

I've added "You may trash this", so that (a) you can use it more times, and (b) it doesn't become a dead card.
I like it much better now.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 24, 2018, 01:30:53 pm
Just added Alliance to my post, has a Catacombs-like draw and gives you Plot tokens for drawing good cards. I really don't know how balanced it is, but it seems like a good idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 24, 2018, 08:00:46 pm
Luck:
Those are cute, but I'd like them better if they just kept the cards out of the suffle. Actually, that's how I had read them when I started writing this post, and I just now realized I had misread. Such tokens would actually be rather similar to Stores, just a bit more fiddly - but with the added advantage that you have to produce them again and again, so the more cards you want to keep out, the more you need to produce. That diminishes the issue of one Pioneer setting up your uncorruptible engine... They can be used rather similar to Freezing tokens, too, and I like how you added them as a drawback for e.g. Woodland Witch. The balance can probably still be improved on some of these, though.

Thanks for the feedback. Personally, I like the bottom-of-your-deck implementation better. If they kept cards out of the shuffle they would feel too similar to the Ice tokens. I was seriously considering letting them top deck cards instead, but, well, top-of-your-deck stuff has already been done a bazillion times. I was trying to come up with something that wasn't just an ability that cards already had made into a token. There are also other subtle strategic things you can do with this besides making bad cards miss the shuffle, like making it easier to draw your deck if you're capable of drawing it, and the ability to order the cards might also come in handy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 25, 2018, 02:15:12 am
(https://i.imgur.com/uX031GK.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/E6aE5yM.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/3wSJFYf.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/QeuXm9D.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 25, 2018, 04:17:01 am
Luck:
Those are cute, but I'd like them better if they just kept the cards out of the suffle. Actually, that's how I had read them when I started writing this post, and I just now realized I had misread. Such tokens would actually be rather similar to Stores, just a bit more fiddly - but with the added advantage that you have to produce them again and again, so the more cards you want to keep out, the more you need to produce. That diminishes the issue of one Pioneer setting up your uncorruptible engine... They can be used rather similar to Freezing tokens, too, and I like how you added them as a drawback for e.g. Woodland Witch. The balance can probably still be improved on some of these, though.

Thanks for the feedback. Personally, I like the bottom-of-your-deck implementation better. If they kept cards out of the shuffle they would feel too similar to the Ice tokens. I was seriously considering letting them top deck cards instead, but, well, top-of-your-deck stuff has already been done a bazillion times. I was trying to come up with something that wasn't just an ability that cards already had made into a token. There are also other subtle strategic things you can do with this besides making bad cards miss the shuffle, like making it easier to draw your deck if you're capable of drawing it, and the ability to order the cards might also come in handy.
Right, but to me, missing the shuffle is already a subtle strategical thing. A lot of players won't even consider this, and it actually stops mattering when you draw your deck - at least that's how I see it. But it's your entry, not mine.

Insert lame Mine joke here. Insert even lamer Mint joke referencing the lame Mine joke here.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on October 25, 2018, 06:18:54 am
Flea Market
Action - $2
+1 Bargain

Bargains: When you gain a card, you may spend a token from your Bargain mat to gain a non-victory card costing less than it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 25, 2018, 07:28:44 am
(https://i.imgur.com/uX031GK.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/E6aE5yM.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/3wSJFYf.jpg)

(https://i.imgur.com/QeuXm9D.jpg)
The design is very interesting, but just letting you know the contest was to use the coin tokens that are used for Coffers (and will be used for Villagers) for another spendable function, not just any new tokens.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 25, 2018, 10:30:04 am
I知 sorry I thought I saw someone using the +1 buy tokens for a different use and thought all existing tokens were fair game. Ah well I値l never have a chance in winning any of these tournaments anyway. Cause I only learn visually anyway. If you had taken a picture of what the tokens look like. Then I would of known for sure. Which to use and which not to use. After all I don稚 know what the villagers tokens look like because they haven稚 been released. Probably should of at least waited till renaissance was fully released before having a contest using such tokens. I mean I played some of the new cards online but it didn稚 give an exact picture to what the tokens look like. Are they metal, plastic or cardboard well we don稚 know. They could look just like the inheritance token for all we know. Because we just don稚 fully know.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 25, 2018, 11:34:34 am
Go read the second Renaissance preview, he says that the tokens will be the same as for coffers but will also used for villagers.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 25, 2018, 12:36:02 pm
I don稚 want to look at the preview stuff anymore. It just makes it more frustrating waiting for it to come out. I知 only posting on here for fun. If my cards pass great! If they don稚 cause of a technicality that I don稚 understand oh well. Think of this as apples to apples. One person says all the requirements for this contest. All the players post what they think meets with his requirements. And probably just pick his favorite that meets his requirements. However he is not obligated to choose a card that is within the requirements. Like for instance in apples to apples the requirement is something sticky bubble gum, tape, spider webs, super glue, bandaids and snakes. The player chose snakes cause he loves reptiles.

Now I that would never happen. But here痴 a question is each person obligated to pick only with the requirements he痴 chooses. Because I don稚 remember seeing that in the beginning post.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 25, 2018, 12:39:49 pm
They aren't obligated to necessarily, however they pick from contest entries and technically if a card doesn't meet the requirements it's not a contest entry.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on October 25, 2018, 12:41:59 pm
Oh well. It wouldn稚 be the first time I didn稚 fully understand what痴 in and what痴 out. And I知 sure it won稚 be the last. Dominion is just game after all. I only make sure I have all the facts for important things like teaching people about animals at the zoo.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 25, 2018, 12:42:50 pm
Guys, please. No need to fight. ClouduHieh, I sent you a message  :)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 25, 2018, 01:54:42 pm
This might be a good time to clarify that the tokens themselves have no effect on what happens when used. It's where (what mat) the tokens come from that matters. The mats should tell you when and what to do when a token is removed. See the Coffers mat as an example.

I think a lot of the confusion is that the official tokens used look like Coin tokens, but they can really be used for anything, not just +$1. In fact, you can use any thing you want for tokens: Pennies, rusty nails, even VP tokens! That last one might be interesting!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 26, 2018, 10:23:23 am
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

(https://imgur.com/x3qypiS.png) (https://i.imgur.com/YNKLT0E.png) (https://i.imgur.com/oEUhr60.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 26, 2018, 12:08:30 pm
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

(https://imgur.com/x3qypiS.png) (https://i.imgur.com/WIxCvba.png) (https://i.imgur.com/oEUhr60.png)
Really cool, but the tokens seem really strong. Glassblower especially seems too strong, compared to Candlestick Maker (which I guess you were using that as a model). Turning any Action into a Lab just seems a lot better than a Coffer.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 12:21:08 pm
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

(https://imgur.com/x3qypiS.png) (https://i.imgur.com/WIxCvba.png) (https://i.imgur.com/oEUhr60.png)
Really cool, but the tokens seem really strong. Glassblower especially seems too strong, compared to Candlestick Maker (which I guess you were using that as a model). Turning any Action into a Lab just seems a lot better than a Coffer.
I am not so sure. Suppose you have a Pearl Diver in hand. Now you can use Glassblower's Science token to draw an extra card. This boils down to Glassblower having being, in hindsight, a Market Square. Not that brilliant.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 26, 2018, 12:31:09 pm
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

(https://imgur.com/x3qypiS.png) (https://i.imgur.com/WIxCvba.png) (https://i.imgur.com/oEUhr60.png)
Really cool, but the tokens seem really strong. Glassblower especially seems too strong, compared to Candlestick Maker (which I guess you were using that as a model). Turning any Action into a Lab just seems a lot better than a Coffer.
I am not so sure. Suppose you have a Pearl Diver in hand. Now you can use Glassblower's Science token to draw an extra card. This boils down to Glassblower having being, in hindsight, a Market Square. Not that brilliant.
Yes, but similar to Candlestick Maker it gets much stronger if you save it up. At the start of your next turn you have a Pearl Diver and whatever else, now it's much better than using it right away. Or it can make dead cards live again. All this is saying that it is a very fun and good concept. I just think it's too good for Glassblower.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 12:35:34 pm
Yes, but similar to Candlestick Maker it gets much stronger if you save it up. At the start of your next turn you have a Pearl Diver and whatever else, now it's much better than using it right away. Or it can make dead cards live again. All this is saying that it is a very fun and good concept. I just think it's too good for Glassblower.
Sure, +1 Card is usually better than +1 Coin so arguably the corresponding token is stronger. But Science tokens are in my opinion weaker than Card tokens. If you have no Action card in your hand left after you play Glassblower you cannot use the Science token and if you only have good Action cards you don't want to use Sciences tokens on them.
This is why I think that the card is fine at $2
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 26, 2018, 01:20:28 pm
Quote
Mulligan Tokens
Any time during your turn that you are not currently resolving the effects of a card, you may spend a mulligan token for the effect: +1 card, then discard a card.

(https://i.imgur.com/9OeJAZ2.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/rOvPtpz.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/Je081Ep.jpg)

Quote
Storehouse
$3 Action
Take four mulligan tokens.

Quote
Runaway
$5 Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Take a mulligan token.

Quote
Barrel
$2 Event
+1 Buy
Trash a card from your hand. Take one mulligan token for each $ in its cost.

Quote
Old Barrel
$1 Event
+1 Buy
Take a mulligan token.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 01:22:39 pm
Fugitive as token looks sound except for Barrel, that is arguably a bit too cheap and thus too automatic if you have left-over Coins.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 26, 2018, 02:53:55 pm
Fugitive as token looks sound except for Barrel, that is arguably a bit too cheap and thus too automatic if you have left-over Coins.
Agreed. It could add diversity in playstyle despite being a must-buy, but I think it's a little too monolithic for my taste. Perhaps remove the buy and make it a 3 for 3 type of thing, or add some type of drawback:
Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png)
+1 Buy
Discard any number of cards, then take a Mulligan token per card discarded.
Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png)
+1 Buy
Take a mulligan token, then put your -1 Card token onto your deck.
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 26, 2018, 02:53:58 pm
Storehouse is too strong and it should cost 4 in my opinion. Runaway could have a small bonus like, 努hen you trash this, gain a cheaper card or similar. Barrel has the Pot of Greed problem. Everyone will use it, it whenever it's possible. That makes games longer without adding fun. I would simply drop that event.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 26, 2018, 03:25:05 pm
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

As a potentially useful comparison, Science is usually a Villager that also replaces the next card with +2 Cards. The obvious combo is Ruins; they also let you Enchantress+ yourself when terminals collide. What is the thinking behind limiting Collector's bonus to Action and Victory cards, as opposed the unrestricted ability of Recruiter?

EDIT: Ignore my misunderstanding of how the tokens would work.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 03:33:43 pm
You may spend a Science token at any time during your Action phase. If you do, the next time you play an Action you get +2 Cards +1 Action instead of following its instructions.

As a potentially useful comparison, Science is usually a Villager that also replaces the next card with +2 Cards.
I fail to see the similarity between Scientist and Villager. Villager provides +1 Action whereas Scientist net yields +1 Card, conditional upon you quasi-discarding (if you shuffle that fellow isn't coming back) an Action card. It is thus only similar to Card tokens and can be read as a generally (sifting through Ruins or hands with too many terminals being the exceptions) weaker version of them.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 26, 2018, 03:43:57 pm
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.

Like Inheritance, Seaway, or Scouting Party?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 26, 2018, 03:46:38 pm
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.

Like Inheritance, Seaway, or Scouting Party?
I almost said the same thing, but it's not quite the same. You inheriting something is an event, you building a seaway is an event, and you go on a scouting party. It's not quite the same as it being a regular object.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 03:47:59 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/cwJR5qs.png)
(a (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Sellsail&description=%2B2%20Cards%0A%2B1%20Action%0A%2B2%20Mutineers&type=Action&credit=Illustration%3A%20nachomolina&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Forig00.deviantart.net%2F7cd1%2Ff%2F2010%2F263%2Fd%2F0%2Fsalladhar__s_crew_by_nachomolina-d2z412n.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=0) b (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Grotto&description=%2B%20%242%0AEach%20other%20player%0Agains%20a%20Mutineer.%0A%0A-%0A%0AWhen%20you%20discard%20this%20other%20than%20during%20Clean-up%2C%20you%20may%20reveal%20it%20to%20gain%20a%20Silver.&type=Action%20-%20Attack%20-%20Reaction&credit=Illustration%3A%20David%20Teniers%20the%20Younger&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.com%2Fimages-medium-large-5%2Fvista-from-a-grotto-flemish-david-teniers-the-younger.jpg&color0=3&color1=0&size=0) c (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Diving%20Bell&description=When%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20each%20other%20player%20gains%203%20Mutineers.%0A%0A-%0A%0AUntil%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20when%20you%20spend%20a%20Mutineer%2C%20additionally%20discard%0Aas%20many%20cards%20from%20your%20hand%20as%20you%20have%20remaining%20Mutineers.&type=Project&credit=&price=%245&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fbeoshewulf.files.wordpress.com%2F2013%2F07%2Falexanders-submersible-with-cat.jpg&color0=15&color1=0&size=1))

Mutineers may be spent during your Action phase at any time when you might spend an action instead, i.e. when no cards are currently resolving. Spending a Mutineer discards a card from your hand. At the end of the game, each unspent Mutineer is worth -1VP.
This is one of the most interesting concepts so some quick comments.

I guess that you mean that you can discard at any during your Action phase in order to get rid of a Mutineer, i.e. making these bastards walk the plank is conditional upon you discarding a card. Otherwise you could spend all Mutineers when you are down to zero cards in hand.

Diving Bell provides some nice interaction and I think that the Project is interesting with as well as without Kingdom cards that hand out Mutineers.

Sellsail is a pretty cool Fugitive variant.

It is nice that Grotto defends against itself but I am not too fond of the Silver gaining. It looks a bit weak compared to Militia but in 3P games it could be nasty as unlike Militia the tokens stack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 26, 2018, 03:50:24 pm
Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png)
+1 Buy
Take a mulligan token, then put your -1 Card token onto your deck.

This version gives you infinite tokens.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 26, 2018, 04:00:51 pm
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.

Like Inheritance, Seaway, or Scouting Party?
I almost said the same thing, but it's not quite the same. You inheriting something is an event, you building a seaway is an event, and you go on a scouting party. It's not quite the same as it being a regular object.
Yeah, all the sideways cards are, or can be read, as what they are. Goat and Pasture are really the only two cards that don't match their type.
I understand that some people approach boardgames in general as a bunch of mechanisms in a box but Dominion does have some theme to it (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19131.0). Claims that the game is totally unthematic are as valid as claims that it is multiplayer solitaire.


Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png)
+1 Buy
Take a mulligan token, then put your -1 Card token onto your deck.

This version gives you infinite tokens.
I think it is evident that Theta meant it to work like Borrow, i.e.:

Once per turn: +1 Buy. If your 1 Card token isn't on your deck, put it there and take a Mulligan token.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 26, 2018, 04:01:55 pm
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.

Like Inheritance, Seaway, or Scouting Party?

I almost said the same thing, but it's not quite the same. You inheriting something is an event, you building a seaway is an event, and you go on a scouting party. It's not quite the same as it being a regular object.

The mix of nouns and verbs as published Events is what gets me. Pathfinding, but not Summoning? Expedition, but not Domination?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Dsell on October 26, 2018, 04:15:24 pm
I was skeptical about this week's contest and couldn't come up with anything very clever myself, but I am blown away by how cool and innovative some of the things y'all are coming up with are. Looks like another tough week of judging, and lots of interesting concepts that could form the basis of many future cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 26, 2018, 04:21:54 pm
Like Inheritance, Seaway, or Scouting Party?

Well, partly. Inheritance is obviously an "event" in one sense of the word, a rich uncle passes away and you get something. Scouting Party also irks me, but it still somewhat implies an event. I interpret it as in the event is you sending the scouting party out and then they come back and give you information. Again with Seaway, it irks me that it's not an event per se, but it somewhat makes sense if you think of it as a seaway being built. Obviously, that would have some effects on your kingdom, and the increase in trade from that event gives you an extra card and the +Buys.

Barrel seems pretty indefensible as an event, though. Perhaps a tweak to something like "Cooperage" would put it more in line with the other cards?

This version gives you infinite tokens.

Whoops! Hlounder is quite right, I meant it to be a borrow knock-off.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: alion8me on October 26, 2018, 06:59:11 pm
Fugitive as token looks sound except for Barrel, that is arguably a bit too cheap and thus too automatic if you have left-over Coins.
Agreed. It could add diversity in playstyle despite being a must-buy, but I think it's a little too monolithic for my taste. Perhaps remove the buy and make it a 3 for 3 type of thing, or add some type of drawback:
Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png)
+1 Buy
Discard any number of cards, then take a Mulligan token per card discarded.
Quote
Barrel - (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png)
+1 Buy
Take a mulligan token, then put your -1 Card token onto your deck.
Also, it's an event. A barrel is not an event. This is a nitpick, but I always hate it when people name events after inanimate objects.

I like the idea of making it not super-spammable, I didn't quite realize that when I made it. I came up with a slightly different solution to the problem, in an attempt to also make it more interesting.
Also, barrel is a verb (as in, they barreled the apples to ready them for transport). It's not exactly the common use of the word, though, and I might change the name of it at some point just because of that. On the other hand, I already have art for "barrel" so I'll keep it that way for now.

(https://i.imgur.com/Je081Ep.jpg)

Quote
Barrel
$2 Event
+1 Buy
Trash a card from your hand. Take one mulligan token for each $ in its cost.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 26, 2018, 07:19:45 pm
I feel like the trashing will dominate the card more than the Mulligan token thing now. At (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) for a free trashing, it's already a pretty powerful event.

Also, I would suggest "Coopery" or "Cooperage" as a name. You can keep the same art, but it's a more interesting name, and Coopery feels consistent with Pathfinding as a sort of trade.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 27, 2018, 02:42:14 am
Baker Kingdom
T1: 3 Coppers, 2 Estates
Spend Coffers token, buy Barrel, trash 2 Estates, take 4 Mulligan tokens.
T2: 4 Coppers, 1 Estate
Spend Mulligan token to sift through the Estate, buy a $5.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 27, 2018, 04:47:52 am
I agree that Barrel doesn't sound like an Event. Even the Events that describe things, most of the time (always?) describe abstract or intangible things. You can't touch a Seaway, Hunting Party, Lost Arts, Summon or Inheritance. A barrel is something you have standing in your Cellar.

Goats used to be something that you would typically trade against other goods, like chickens, or camels in other countries, or eggs... Given the celtic theme of Nocturne, I'm enclined to let that slide. I never really thought about Pasture, but, uh, I guess you could say it describes both the land and the grass your sheep eat? Personally I'm much more offended by Amulet not being a Treasure.

Also, do a Barrel Roll.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ThetaSigma12 on October 27, 2018, 08:09:55 am
Goats used to be something that you would typically trade against other goods, like chickens, or camels in other countries, or eggs... Given the celtic theme of Nocturne, I'm enclined to let that slide. I never really thought about Pasture, but, uh, I guess you could say it describes both the land and the grass your sheep eat? Personally I'm much more offended by Amulet not being a Treasure.

That was my justification for both of them too. Livestock has historically been used as currency. Recently, in fact, the president of Zimbabwe suggested people could use goats instead of cash (https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-39639204). Pastures are also valuable and land has been a trade good as far back as property rights were invented.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on October 27, 2018, 04:03:23 pm
But Goat is a Treasure card in Dominion, so you can pay with Goats. And they even have a positive effect. While Beggars and Ill-Gotten Gains increase the money supply, Goats can even eat Copper to counteract the inflation.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 27, 2018, 07:09:51 pm
But Goat is a Treasure card in Dominion, so you can pay with Goats. And they even have a positive effect. While Beggars and Ill-Gotten Gains increase the money supply, Goats can even eat Copper to counteract the inflation.
Makes sense. The value of a goat is a real, not an arbitrarily assigned one. So it's no wonder they make for a reliable investment. More so than Gold, in fact.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 28, 2018, 03:10:13 pm
I'll name my winner and runners-up in a few hours. If there are any last minute ideas to float by, go ahead and submit soon.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tarken on October 28, 2018, 06:05:58 pm
Quote
CHALLENGE #5: NEW TYPE OF SPENDABLE TOKEN

This is a two-fold challenge. First, create a new use for the standard coin tokens used for Coffers and Villagers. Give it a name, describe when you can spend these tokens, and describe what happens when each token is spent. Second, create at least one card (up to three) that allows for gaining these tokens.

The best combination of token and card will be the winner. If your token is similar to a previously-submitted token, that's fine; just give it a different name at the very least.

If there are any questions about the parameters of this challenge, please ask away.

Edit: Changed rules to allow entrants to design up to three cards that all gain the same new token.



My submission is inspired by French Revolution. I was also inspired by Violet CLM idea of Mutineers.

Quote
Mutineers may be spent during your Action phase at any time when you might spend an action instead, i.e. when no cards are currently resolving. Spending a Mutineer discards a card from your hand. At the end of the game, each unspent Mutineer is worth -1VP.


My submission:

Each Revolution token is worth -1VP at the end of the game.




(http://tarken.krakonos.org/dominion/Guillotine.png)


(http://tarken.krakonos.org/dominion/SupportTheRevolution.png)

(http://tarken.krakonos.org/dominion/LetThemEatCake.png)


Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 28, 2018, 09:44:56 pm
I think it's time to announce my winner! First of all, I want to thank everyone who participated in this weekly contest of mine. Despite the difficulty of the challenge, many of you rose to it and presented some creative tokens and cards. While some entries didn't quite match the guidelines I set, I thoroughly enjoyed pondering every entry.

Before I make the announcement, I would like to contribute my own take on my challenge. While I couldn't enter my own contest for obvious reasons, I did want to show at least one of the ideas I came up with. And since it's not an official entry, I'm breaking my own rules and presenting four cards that use my token (sorry I don't have an official-looking mat like Kudasai and Fly-Eagles-Fly):

(https://i.imgur.com/5Vny1cD.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/FfN92fS.png) (https://i.imgur.com/8mYJfqf.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/2KULNqv.png) (https://i.imgur.com/0YAnQbM.png)

Quote
Crafters
Token
-
Once per Buy phase on your turns: You may remove tokens from this to gain a card costing up to $2 per token removed.

Holiday Village
Action - $4
-
+2 Actions
Reveal the top card of your deck, then put it into your hand. If it's an...
Attack card, gain a Curse.
Treasure card, gain a Silver.
Victory card, +1 Crafter.
$0-cost card, you may trash it.

Tailor
Action - $4
-
Gain a card costing up to $4. If it costs less than $4, +1 Crafter.

Con Artist
Action/Attack - $5
-
Each other player reveals the top three cards of their deck, discards one of your choice, then puts the rest back in any order. +1 Crafter for each differently-named card revealed by the player to your left.

Factory
Action - $6
-
+3 Crafters
You may not play any more Actions this turn.
-
While this is in play, when you gain a card using Crafters, you may gain a second card costing up to $1 per Crafter used.

Any feedback on my ideas is always welcome.

---

And now, the moment you have all been waiting for! After considering each set of tokens and cards for the creativity of the token and how well the cards fit with it, I have selected a Top 5 (because narrowing it down to 2 was just too hard, and there were so many that I wanted to compliment). From fifth to first, we have:

5th Place: Gubump's Grant and Endurance
-
My favorite of the entries with a single card. Quite a neat idea to have a token be able to turn a regular Action into a Duration. A powerful token indeed, softened by Grant's one-shot  nature. I would like to see more cards that grant Endurance.

4th Place: hypercube's Science set
-
Science is perhaps the most creative token idea of the contest. It effectively turns a potentially dead card into a Laboratory. The cards that gain Science tokens fit the Science theme rather nicely and would potentially make good Science targets themselves.

3rd Place: Fly-Eagles-Fly's Plots set
-
Complex perhaps, but I like it like that. The tokens can be strong but the mechanic incorporating the card's cost helps keep this from getting too nutty. The cards themselves have some neat effects and complement the Plot tokens nicely.

And now, the top two. This was really difficult; I kept going back and forth between these two as the winner and runner-up. Ultimately, my decision is...

2nd Place: Kudasai's Stores set
-
A token-esque version of Pirate Ship, but so much better and more intuitive in my opinion. Plus, the cards that went with it had very creative uses of the Stores mat itself.

THE WINNER OF THE CREATE-A-TOKEN CONTEST IS... VIOLET CLM's MUTINEERS SET!
-
I fell in love with this the moment I saw it. First, of all of the token ideas I came up with on my own, not a single one of them had a negative effect. As soon as I saw what Mutineers do, I just had to yell, "Why didn't I think of that?!" The nautical-themed cards themselves fit with the Mutineers theme quite well, too. I especially love Diving Bell as a combination of Attack and Mutineers abettor. Still, I do have some confusion over how to spend the Mutineers. At first, I read it as you have to use an Action to do so. Also, make sure it's clear that you must discard a card when you want to rid yourself of a Mutineer. Other than that, though, I had to give this the win due to the cohesiveness of the entire set.

I look forward to seeing what you have in store for the next challenge, Violet CLM. And once again, thanks to everyone for your entries and your comments. I had a lot of fun with this, and I hope you all did, too. See you for Challenge #6!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 29, 2018, 12:03:11 am
Thanks for the thoughtful deliberation! I agree with your winning choice. Mutineer tokens are such a cool idea.

Good luck to you in challenge #6.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 29, 2018, 02:09:39 am
Ooh, I'm delightfully surprised--thanks for the kind words! The genesis for the idea was very simple: I thought about all the basic Dominion keywords that could conceivably be bound to spendable tokens, and "discard" seemed the most interesting. Their effectiveness as attacks probably varies hugely by kingdom, though, even putting aside the issue of how big a deal -1 point is depending on the VP options... cards like Tunnel, Poor House, Menagerie, or Library would all make me buy Sellsail specifically for the tokens. But hey, maybe that kind of variability is a good thing.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 29, 2018, 08:58:07 am
Wow, third! Thanks a lot. I think you got it right with your decisions. Also, nice 'submission' yourself!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: vishwathg on October 29, 2018, 02:51:13 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/0YAnQbM.png)

What happens if you Throne Room a Factory?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 29, 2018, 02:52:46 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/0YAnQbM.png)

What happens if you Throne Room a Factory?
I would guess that you would only play Factory once. If it said Action cards I would think otherwise.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 29, 2018, 02:58:12 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/0YAnQbM.png)

What happens if you Throne Room a Factory?
I would guess that you would only play Factory once. If it said Action cards I would think otherwise.
And what happen if my Venture hits a Crown?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 29, 2018, 03:54:46 pm
If your boss tells you to murder the annoying client but the penal law says that murder is a capital crime it is not really unclear which commandment you should follow.
In real life as well as nearly all boardgames "don't" trumps "do".
Meaning concretely here that you have to come up with some practical solution, i.e. put the Action card in play but don't resolve it or discard the Action.

Beyond this rules trivia I think that Factory could be too strong. You can read it as "+1 Buy +6 Coins and don't play anyother Actions" (ignoring the below-the-line stuff for the sake of simplicity). Not so nice with Action diggers like Golem, Ghost or Herald but otherwise pretty good; 3/4 of a Province isn't bad for a terminal payload card at $6. Sure, you only want one as they don't stack but it seems fairly automatic in engines as well as money decks.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 29, 2018, 05:24:20 pm
Perhaps I could change Factory's effect to "Immediately end your Action phase." And if Factory is too strong, what about Con Artist? Maybe you should be forced to remove all Crafters when you decide to use them?

Still, I like these conversations. I should start a thread for my own creations so I can get more feedback.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 29, 2018, 05:57:04 pm
Perhaps I could change Factory's effect to "Immediately end your Action phase." And if Factory is too strong, what about Con Artist? Maybe you should be forced to remove all Crafters when you decide to use them?

Still, I like these conversations. I should start a thread for my own creations so I can get more feedback.
That wording should work, and I think it would make it more strategic if you needed to use all of them, since you want to use them sooner to get the full value. It certainly wouldn't make it less strategic, anyway.
Con Artist is probably too strong, maybe +1 Crafters for every three differently named cards revealed by the other players combined? Not sure that works well in practiced, but seems like it should be balanced.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 29, 2018, 07:47:27 pm
Dominion is not most boardgames, it is a boardgame. The fact that most humans like chocolate doesn't mean that one specific human does, and neither can you say what applies for Dominion. Rather, the fact that in all these years such a rule was never introduced speaks for itself.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 29, 2018, 10:48:26 pm
Dominion is not most boardgames, it is a boardgame. The fact that most humans like chocolate doesn't mean that one specific human does, and neither can you say what applies for Dominion. Rather, the fact that in all these years such a rule was never introduced speaks for itself.

I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying, but I thought there was a rule like that in Dominion (though it may not be explicit) so that e.g. you know Moat gets priority over Militia.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 30, 2018, 03:47:45 am
4. The winner of a challenge posts the next challenge.
aaaaaaaah sorry sorry I totally forgot about this part

okay, so, uhhh

CHALLENGE #6: INSPIRED BY ANOTHER BOARD/CARD GAME
Your model here is Governor much more than it is Walled Village: design a card-shaped object in some way inspired by the rules of a board or card game other than Dominion. (Also kindly specify which game you're working from because I assume we haven't all of us played 100% of games ever made.) Be careful, though, that the game with the inclusion of your object is still Dominion. At the extreme end, don't write a card that says "play a game of Backgammon with the player to your left--if you win, +$4." But even a Landmark that replaces Dominion's supply piles with the rotating supply from Through the Ages or St. Petersburg is probably a bit beyond the scope of this challenge.

If your idea is better served as multiple card-shaped objects for whatever reason--heirlooms, split piles, prizes, non-supply piles, whatever--sure, go for it, that's fine.

Busen Memo is not allowed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 30, 2018, 04:41:59 am
Homage to Pandemic!

(https://i.imgur.com/CWacToI.jpg)

Embargo tokens work the same as with Embargo.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on October 30, 2018, 05:17:39 am
Dominion is not most boardgames, it is a boardgame. The fact that most humans like chocolate doesn't mean that one specific human does, and neither can you say what applies for Dominion. Rather, the fact that in all these years such a rule was never introduced speaks for itself.

I'm not sure if I understand what you're saying, but I thought there was a rule like that in Dominion (though it may not be explicit) so that e.g. you know Moat gets priority over Militia.
Certainly not explicit, and Moat is as close as it gets.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on October 30, 2018, 06:28:00 am

A traveller line as Hommage to Stratego. My design tries to implicit that you will need a good mix of all travellers. Young Spys Draw-to-5-ability reduces the risk of getting stripped of all travellers.

Marshal ACTION - TRAVELLER
6$*
+3cards
+ 2$

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 5$ (or reveals he can稚).
******************************************************************************************************************



General ACTION - TRAVELLER
5$*
+3 cards
Gain a Silver.

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 4$ (or reveals he can稚).

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Marshal.
******************************************************************************************************************


Colonel ACTION - TRAVELLER
4$*
+2 actions
+ 2 buys

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 3$ (or reveals he can稚).

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a General.
******************************************************************************************************************


Miner ACTION - TRAVELLER
3$*
+ 3 actions

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Colonel.

 ******************************************************************************************************************

Young Spy ACTION - TRAVELLER
$2
+Action
Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 6$ (or reveals he can稚).
_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Miner.






















Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 30, 2018, 07:43:47 am
Based on the resource accumulation spaces of Agricola:

(https://i.imgur.com/BwS7Kcn.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 09:14:26 am
Based on the resource accumulation spaces of Agricola:

(https://i.imgur.com/uKnEtRC.jpg)
Nice! Agricola is my third or so favorite board game. This fits it perfectly.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 30, 2018, 09:39:23 am
See this post (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775488#msg775488) for the latest version of this card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 10:34:23 am
I know Carcassonne has been done already, but:

(https://i.imgur.com/HAWtHF5.jpg)

Quote
Cloister
Cost: $8
Types: Action - Duration - Victory
Now and at the start of each of your turns: If this is in play, you may play a non-Duration Action card from your hand. If you do, put it next to this card.
-
During clean-up, if there are eight cards next to this card, discard this and all cards next to it, and take 9 VP.  Otherwise, this card and all cards next to it stay in play.
-
At the end of the game, if this is in play, it is worth 1 VP plus 1 VP for each card next to it.

Clarification: Only cards played as part of the card's effect count as cards "next to" Cloister.  Merely putting a card next to it on the table isn't enough.
Really cool! Two things:
Can you put a Cloister next to a Cloister, or next to other cards played by Cloister, like in Carcassone? Basically, can cards count as being next to multiple Cloisters? Also, the green and orange should be switched.
Edit: Also, I think you want +9VP instead of take 9VP.
And nevermind, you already answered the question.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 30, 2018, 11:15:50 am
A Traveller line inspired by Bohnanza:

(https://i.imgur.com/VX36BEQ.png) (https://i.imgur.com/5mBdHdx.png) (https://i.imgur.com/VYN5wPV.png) (https://i.imgur.com/tx7Ii7o.png) (https://i.imgur.com/H5zssWr.png)

Much like Bohnanza, it has various colours of beans, cards that get better when you have multiple copies, and exchanging. I didn't want to put multiple dividing lines on so Blue Bean and Green Bean get unusual exchange conditions. Blue Bean's condition also prevents you from playing all your Blue Beans, then exchanging them on your final turn to score a bunch.

Small change to Wax Bean wording to match Bank.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 30, 2018, 11:20:39 am
Can you put a Cloister next to a Cloister, or next to other cards played by Cloister, like in Carcassone? Basically, can cards count as being next to multiple Cloisters?

Good question!  Fixed by changing the clarification.

Quote
Also, the green and orange should be switched.
Edit: Also, I think you want +9VP instead of take 9VP.

OK.  Fixed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 11:23:52 am
Can you put a Cloister next to a Cloister, or next to other cards played by Cloister, like in Carcassone? Basically, can cards count as being next to multiple Cloisters?

Good question!  Fixed by changing the clarification.

Quote
Also, the green and orange should be switched.
Edit: Also, I think you want +9VP instead of take 9VP.

OK.  Fixed.
But you can't place a Cloister next to another Cloister, since it's a duration card, but you can arrange the grid so that a card is next to multiple cloisters, is that right?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 30, 2018, 11:25:11 am
But you can't place a Cloister next to another Cloister, since it's a duration card, but you can arrange the grid so that a card is next to multiple cloisters, is that right?

Well spotted!  I have changed it so that you can place Cloisters, and so that there has to be room for it.  I guess if I had room I'd introduce a Cloister Mat with a grid on it, but I really don't have any more room on that card :-)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 30, 2018, 11:37:35 am
Dominion is not most boardgames, it is a boardgame. The fact that most humans like chocolate doesn't mean that one specific human does, and neither can you say what applies for Dominion. Rather, the fact that in all these years such a rule was never introduced speaks for itself.

I think within the past year, we did finally get a ruling that "can't trumps do" in Dominion...

Thread here (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14887.msg653428#msg653428). (Was 2 years ago).

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 11:52:12 am
A Traveller line inspired by Bohnanza:

(https://i.imgur.com/eVYoAPv.png) (https://i.imgur.com/5mBdHdx.png) (https://i.imgur.com/VYN5wPV.png) (https://i.imgur.com/tx7Ii7o.png) (https://i.imgur.com/H5zssWr.png)

Much like Bohnanza, it has various colours of beans, cards that get better when you have multiple copies, and exchanging. I didn't want to put multiple dividing lines on so Blue Bean and Green Bean get unusual exchange conditions. Blue Bean's condition also prevents you from playing all your Blue Beans, then exchanging them on your final turn to score a bunch.
Really cool line! One thing, I think you should reword Wax Bean to match Bank: When you play this, it痴 worth $1 per Wax Bean you have in play (counting this).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on October 30, 2018, 11:53:24 am
Based on the resource accumulation spaces of Agricola:

(https://i.imgur.com/uKnEtRC.jpg)

This is absolutely beautiful in its simplicity. My only concern is that buying it every few turns or so will feel too forced. It's a neat mental battle about whether or not you can get even more if you wait it out, but I don't think there will ever be a game where it can just be ignored. I suppose Donate can't ever be ignored either, but that's generally a decision you have to make once; games using this will have an extra decision to make throughout the whole game.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 02:27:58 pm
This is absolutely beautiful in its simplicity. My only concern is that buying it every few turns or so will feel too forced. It's a neat mental battle about whether or not you can get even more if you wait it out, but I don't think there will ever be a game where it can just be ignored.
True, but this makes it feel even more like Agricola.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 30, 2018, 02:48:14 pm
CHALLENGE #6: INSPIRED BY ANOTHER BOARD/CARD GAME

(https://i.imgur.com/RIiyDzE.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/37ygkIl.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/Ane5sa8.jpg)


This has a rare interaction with Trade Route that I'll try and address here. If there are any Victory Kingdom card piles like Gardens or Nobles, it is possible to take the Coin token there that is meant for the Trade Route Mat.

In this example I will use Gardens, but this applies to all Kingdom Victory cards. If no Gardens have be gained that game and the number of Panda cards you have in play is more or equal to the number of Coin tokens on the Gardens pile (3+ Panda cards and 3 Coin tokens usually), if you gain a Gardens, two things attempt to happen. (1) A Coin token gets moved to the Trade Route Mat and (2) you take 3 Coin tokens from the pile. Being that there are only 3 Coin tokens and you are trying to do things with 4 Coin tokens, one of these things doesn't happen. As they all happen at once, you do get to choose however. You could take all 3 Coin tokens, or only take 2 and put 1 on the Trade Route Mat.

Just know, once that original Coin token placed by the Trade Route setup is removed, the Trade Route Mat will permanently be down 1 Coin token. Adding more Coin tokens later to the Garden pile with Gardener and gaining a Gardens will not attempt to move a Coin token to the Trade Route mat, since it only cared about the original Coin token it placed, not just any Coin token.

If you do take the Coin token placed by Trade Route, it can be used normally like any other Coin token.


These cards are inspired by the wildly fun game:
Takenoko
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on October 30, 2018, 03:01:35 pm
Quick thought: Panda should probably specify "(VP or Coin)" too for the "take 1 token" instruction, unless you want this to be a pseudo-attack card against Teacher and its event cousins.


(everything looks great so far y'all)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 03:02:37 pm
And now, introducing the long awaited RioGrande/DaysOfWonder Crossover the world has been waiting for,
Dominion: Ticket to Ride!
The expansion, if it was real, would come with an undetermined number Ticket cards and about 19 Tokens numbered 1-19. To play, you put a token on each supply pile that costs more than $0. Then you deal out three Tickets to each player. Each player may return one of their starting tickets, and at any time during their turn may spend an Action to draw three more tickets, of which they may return up to two. The Tickets each have two numbers on them. To complete a Ticket, you need to gain a card from both piles on a ticket in a single turn. When you complete a Ticket, you receive +1VP for every $1 in the combined cost of the two cards. At the end of the game, you receive -1VP for every $2 in the combined cost of the two cards at the top of the needed piles. When you use Tickets and there are no gainers/+Buys in the kingdom, add the event Seaway. (I hope to find a better solution for needing multiple Buys).
I'll probably add to the description later.
Edit: Changed it so you only need to keep one ticket if you draw more tickets later in the game, like in the real T2R.

(https://i.imgur.com/xO4wlFV.jpg)
Here's a ticket, the fact that it uses money symbols doesn't mean anything.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 03:03:26 pm
CHALLENGE #6: INSPIRED BY ANOTHER BOARD/CARD GAME

(https://i.imgur.com/6VinNba.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/T43AwXJ.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/JfF1KFJ.jpg)

These have some funky (but not broken!) interactions with Trade Route, Gathering cards, Defiled Shrine, and Aqueduct. I'll try and address them upfront:
-Trade Route: This is probably the most annoying to keep track of so I'll address this first. In games with both of these, Victory Supply piles will each start with 2 Coin tokens on them (1 from Trade Route's setup and 1 from Panda/Gardener's setup). If you gain a Victory card with Panda in play, 1 token goes to the Trade Route mat and 1 goes to your Coffers/Villagers mat. If you gain a Victory card without a Panda in play, 1 token goes to the Trade Route mat as normal. The tricky part is now making sure no more tokens go to the Trade Route mat from that Victory pile as more tokens can be added via Gardener. This sounds wonky, but Trade Route only cares about the Coin token it put on the Victory pile, not any other tokens on it.
-Gathering cards: Gardener can add VP tokens to Gathering Supply piles and they can then be taken through the various ways Gathering cards take VP tokens.
-Defiled Shrine: Gaining an Action card will move all VP tokens from that pile to the Defiled Shrine Landmark, even VP tokens put there by Gardener.
-Aqueduct: VP tokens added to the Silver and Gold piles by Gardener can then be moved to the Aqueduct Landmark.

Other than that, the balancing on these might need some attention, but I have a whole week for that. I'm just eager to get these posted before anyone else beats me to this game.

And speaking of, this was inspired by the wildly fun game:
Takenoko
If you were playing with some of last week's submissions, would you be able to add tokens to those mats also?
Really cool submission.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on October 30, 2018, 06:08:29 pm
For my board game crossover, I have chosen the most fun, most well-balanced, most strategic, most friendship-building title in history...

MONOPOLY

*whack* *bam* *punch* *slam* *spit*

Ouch... I deserved that.

But anyway, yes, I chose the game that regular people call the most quintessential board game in existence, while we more avid gamers may declare it a waste of cardboard and paper money. But it did inspire this card...

(https://i.imgur.com/1bNv4iRl.png)

Quote
Jail
Action/Duration - $2
---
+$3
At the start of your next turn, trash a Silver or discard two copies of a card from your hand. If you can't, end your turn.
-
During your Cleanup phase, if you don't have three copies of any card in play, discard this.

This comes from the Monopoly mechanic where rolling three doubles (playing three of the same card) in a row lands you in jail. When in jail, you can pay money to get out (trashing the Treasure) or roll a double (discarding two cards with the same name), or just wait three turns (losing your Action phase). If you can stay out of Jail, though, you're in the money!

I did make some more Monopoly-inspired cards, but I felt Jail was enough torture for you all.

Edit: Changed Jail to an Action-Duration because I started to hate the original version.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on October 30, 2018, 06:15:01 pm
Really cool line! One thing, I think you should reword Wax Bean to match Bank: When you play this, it痴 worth $1 per Wax Bean you have in play (counting this).

Good point, I'll make that change.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 30, 2018, 07:22:04 pm
Homage to Pandemic!

(https://i.imgur.com/CWacToI.jpg)

Embargo tokens work the same as with Embargo.

Time to order more Embargo tokens! I've always wondered if it were possible to make a semi-forced, cooperation card for Dominion and I think you've done a pretty good job of it.

I think you can cut some of the wording here and there:

(1) The trashing has no real reason to be attached to the type of the Supple Pile you removed tokens from. Since you can choose any Supply pile arbitrarily, whether it has Embargo tokens on it or not, the trashing in effect has no condition. You might as well say, "Trash up to 3 cards from your hand." This does of course matter if you decide to clear an Action supply pile and you want to trash a Victory or Treasure card, but this is such a fast trasher, I think all your starting cards will be gone before the embargo tokens start flying. This also removes the restriction of having to essentially trash the same named card, but I don't think this will change much either. Trashing 3 cards per turn whether they have to be the same named card or not will likely get you to about the same deck size for the same number of turns.
(2) The bottom portion probably needs to start as "In games using this, when you shuffle your deck, ..."

Cool submission!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on October 30, 2018, 07:31:46 pm
Inspired by Castell:

Quote
Name: Casteller
Cost: $6
Types: Action
+1 card
+1 action

While this is in play, whenever you play an Action or Treasure card costing less than all other cards you have in play, +$1.

The idea is to reward you for playing big-to-small, the same way you stack your people in Castell. Also, there are some fun tricks you can do with Procession or Counterfeit.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 30, 2018, 07:38:53 pm

A traveller line as Hommage to Stratego. My design tries to implicit that you will need a good mix of all travellers. Young Spys Draw-to-5-ability reduces the risk of getting stripped of all travellers.

Marshal ACTION - TRAVELLER
6$*
+3cards
+ 2$

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 5$ (or reveals he can稚).
******************************************************************************************************************



General ACTION - TRAVELLER
5$*
+3 cards
Gain a Silver.

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 4$ (or reveals he can稚).

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Marshal.
******************************************************************************************************************


Colonel ACTION - TRAVELLER
4$*
+2 actions
+ 2 buys

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 3$ (or reveals he can稚).

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a General.
******************************************************************************************************************


Miner ACTION - TRAVELLER
3$*
+ 3 actions

_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Colonel.

 ******************************************************************************************************************

Young Spy ACTION - TRAVELLER
$2
+Action
Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.

Each opponent discards a traveller costing 6$ (or reveals he can稚).
_____________________________________________________________
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Miner.

Stratego! What an amazing game and you've managed to capture a lot of its essence and port it over to Dominion! I'm sad though you haven't included Bombs somehow. :P

I love the mechanics of this, but I do recommend buffing buffing a lot of the on-play effects for these cards. Going through the motions of exchanging Travelers takes time and more so if you're discarding them from other players Attacks. The rewards need to be big enough that a player will risk their buys and time to get them.

The discarding could possibly be a bit too brutal. Maybe Miner can have some effect to help get your discarded Traveler cards back into play faster?

Thanks for sharing. Now I might have to dust off my copy of Stratego from 30 or so years ago.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on October 30, 2018, 07:44:20 pm
An attempted Sheriff of Nottingham emulation (Couldn't use the word Contraband, unfortunately):

(https://i.imgur.com/KhNgn4u.png)

I'm sad though you haven't included Bombs somehow. :P

I'm sad he didn't include Scouts.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 30, 2018, 07:48:12 pm
Inspired by Castell:

Quote
Name: Casteller
Cost: $6
Types: Action
+1 card
+1 action

While this is in play, whenever you play an Action or Treasure card costing less than all other cards you have in play, +$1.

The idea is to reward you for playing big-to-small, the same way you stack your people in Castell. Also, there are some fun tricks you can do with Procession or Counterfeit.

Really cool card idea! I like cards that in one way or another encourage keeping some Coppers around.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 30, 2018, 07:49:21 pm
An attempted Sheriff of Nottingham emulation:

(https://i.imgur.com/KhNgn4u.png)
Wow, all my favorite games are being done here! Great card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 30, 2018, 10:53:31 pm
And now, introducing the long awaited RioGrande/DaysOfWonder Crossover the world has been waiting for,
Dominion: Ticket to Ride!
The expansion, if it was real, would come with an undetermined number Ticket cards and about 19 Tokens numbered 1-19. To play, you put a token on each supply pile that costs more than $0. Then you deal out three Tickets to each player. Each player may return one of their starting tickets, and at any time may spend an Action to draw three more tickets. The Tickets each have two numbers on them. To complete a Ticket, you need to gain a card from both piles on a ticket in a single turn. When you complete a Ticket, you receive +1VP for every $1 in the combined cost of the two cards. At the end of the game, you receive -1VP for every $2 in the combined cost of the two cards at the top of the needed piles.
I'll probably add to the description later, and might add an example Ticket.

Ticket to Ride was actually my first choice for a game to port over. Connecting the routes for points seemed like a cool concept, but I gave up on the idea for lack of knowing how to implement it. So, I commend you for coming up with something that seems like it could actually work.

A few questions/concerns:
(1) When you spend an Action to draw 3 Destination Cards do you then return 1 of them as you do in the opening?
(2) Since you need at least 2 Buys/Gains to complete a Destination card, you should include an extra Buy each turn in games using this.

Can't wait to see what you come up with! You could probably come up with some cool gainer concepts that will work for Dominion in general, but work especially well for completing Destination cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on October 31, 2018, 12:50:23 am
Does Dungeons and Dragons count as a board game?

Quote
Ancient Ruin
Action - Gathering $4
+2 Actions
The third time you play an action this turn, put 1VP on the Ancient Ruin supply pile, then you may trash this to take the VP from the Ancient Ruin supply pile.

The idea is that you're exploring this dungeon with your buddies (other actions) and the longer you explore, the greater the risk (of character death), but also the greater the reward (treasure).
(I'll maybe make a nice render with violet CLM's generator later)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on October 31, 2018, 12:58:08 am
For my board game crossover, I have chosen the most fun, most well-balanced, most strategic, most friendship-building title in history...

MONOPOLY

*whack* *bam* *punch* *slam* *spit*

Ouch... I deserved that.

But anyway, yes, I chose the game that regular people call the most quintessential board game in existence, while we more avid gamers may declare it a waste of cardboard and paper money. But it did inspire this card...

(https://i.imgur.com/1bNv4iRl.png)

Quote
Jail
Action/Duration - $2
---
+$3
At the start of your next turn, trash a Silver or discard two copies of a card from your hand. If you can't, end your turn.
-
During your Cleanup phase, if you don't have three copies of any card in play, discard this.

This comes from the Monopoly mechanic where rolling three doubles (playing three of the same card) in a row lands you in jail. When in jail, you can pay money to get out (trashing the Treasure) or roll a double (discarding two cards with the same name), or just wait three turns (losing your Action phase). If you can stay out of Jail, though, you're in the money!

I did make some more Monopoly-inspired cards, but I felt Jail was enough torture for you all.

Edit: Changed Jail to an Action-Duration because I started to hate the original version.

"*whack* *bam* *punch* *slam* *spit*" is how I felt trying to track how this card plays. :P You've packed a very complicated concept into a very small card space. Impressive! Now that I do understand it, I feel it would be easy enough to play with.

I'm assuming "end you turn" means you'll still have a Clean-up phase in order to get the Jail discarded from play? That could be worded a little more clearly, but you're already tight on space.

Might be best to use this wording, "At the start of your next turn, discard 2 copies of a card or trash a card from your hand." This is just a simple switch, but it's more accurate given discarding is always from your hand by default, but trashing is not.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 31, 2018, 03:51:38 am
Long time reader, first second time submitter:

(https://i.imgur.com/lgbZOvX.png)

Take two! (A previous and notedly bad submission is spoilered below. This one might still be bad, let's find out.) I'm still sticking with Temporum, but this time going for the concept of ruling Times. Here, your bonus for ruling a pile is on-buy VP. Each player gets Coronet tokens in their player color. Let's say they each get 10, like Temporum, but they probably don't need that many. You can use the crowns that come with Temporum, even.


Quote
Decree: Action-Duration, $2
+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, you may move a Decree token to a Kingdom pile without one.


Setup: Put the 3 Decree tokens on Kingdom piles; non-Decree Kingdom cards from piles without Decree tokens cannot be played.

Temporum, originally a Dominion spin-off, has spun-on again. Only being able to visit 4 of 10 real Zones at a time is reimagined as only being able to play 4 of 10 Kingdom cards at time. The time-traveling theme didn't fit, but you can see the parallels by replacing "Decree token" with "Real Zone token", and the card name with "Change History". My main concern is this might be a must-buy in games using it. I appreciate any feedback!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 31, 2018, 04:14:20 am
Long time reader, first time submitter:

(https://i.imgur.com/R7Acq8v.png)

Quote
Decree: Action-Duration, $2
+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, you may move a Decree token to a Kingdom pile without one.

Setup: Put the 3 Decree tokens on Kingdom piles; non-Decree Kingdom cards from piles without Decree tokens cannot be played.

Temporum, originally a Dominion spin-off, has spun-on again. Only being able to visit 4 of 10 real Zones at a time is reimagined as only being able to play 4 of 10 Kingdom cards at time. The time-traveling theme didn't fit, but you can see the parallels by replacing "Decree token" with "Real Zone token", and the card name with "Change History". My main concern is this might be a must-buy in games using it. I appreciate any feedback!
Well, that is a massive change to gameplay. It is not clear to me whether every player has their own decree tokens (I think they definitely should). I would try to avoid referencing Kingdom cards since that leads to many questions (like, how does this play with Black Market?). Action supply pile may be enough.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on October 31, 2018, 06:02:44 am
But you can't place a Cloister next to another Cloister, since it's a duration card, but you can arrange the grid so that a card is next to multiple cloisters, is that right?

Well spotted!  I have changed it so that you can place Cloisters, and so that there has to be room for it.  I guess if I had room I'd introduce a Cloister Mat with a grid on it, but I really don't have any more room on that card :-)

Having slept on it, for the sake of simplicity, I've changed it back to non-Duration, and made it so that you need separate cards for each one.  Less Carcassonne-y, but more actually practical in a real game of Dominion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 31, 2018, 08:28:09 am
And now, introducing the long awaited RioGrande/DaysOfWonder Crossover the world has been waiting for,
Dominion: Ticket to Ride!
The expansion, if it was real, would come with an undetermined number Ticket cards and about 19 Tokens numbered 1-19. To play, you put a token on each supply pile that costs more than $0. Then you deal out three Tickets to each player. Each player may return one of their starting tickets, and at any time may spend an Action to draw three more tickets. The Tickets each have two numbers on them. To complete a Ticket, you need to gain a card from both piles on a ticket in a single turn. When you complete a Ticket, you receive +1VP for every $1 in the combined cost of the two cards. At the end of the game, you receive -1VP for every $2 in the combined cost of the two cards at the top of the needed piles.
I'll probably add to the description later, and might add an example Ticket.

Ticket to Ride was actually my first choice for a game to port over. Connecting the routes for points seemed like a cool concept, but I gave up on the idea for lack of knowing how to implement it. So, I commend you for coming up with something that seems like it could actually work.

A few questions/concerns:
(1) When you spend an Action to draw 3 Destination Cards do you then return 1 of them as you do in the opening?
(2) Since you need at least 2 Buys/Gains to complete a Destination card, you should include an extra Buy each turn in games using this.

Can't wait to see what you come up with! You could probably come up with some cool gainer concepts that will work for Dominion in general, but work especially well for completing Destination cards.
I'm going to follow the T2R rules and say when you draw three later in the game you only need to keep one. For now, to simplify the needing two buys thing, I'll just say add Seaway to the kingdom. Lame, I know. I'll probably come up with something better later, but I'll put this here in case I don't.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 31, 2018, 08:46:35 am
Homage to Pandemic!
[card]
Embargo tokens work the same as with Embargo.

Time to order more Embargo tokens! I've always wondered if it were possible to make a semi-forced, cooperation card for Dominion and I think you've done a pretty good job of it.

I think you can cut some of the wording here and there:

(1) The trashing has no real reason to be attached to the type of the Supple Pile you removed tokens from. Since you can choose any Supply pile arbitrarily, whether it has Embargo tokens on it or not, the trashing in effect has no condition. You might as well say, "Trash up to 3 cards from your hand." This does of course matter if you decide to clear an Action supply pile and you want to trash a Victory or Treasure card, but this is such a fast trasher, I think all your starting cards will be gone before the embargo tokens start flying. This also removes the restriction of having to essentially trash the same named card, but I don't think this will change much either. Trashing 3 cards per turn whether they have to be the same named card or not will likely get you to about the same deck size for the same number of turns.
(2) The bottom portion probably needs to start as "In games using this, when you shuffle your deck, ..."

Cool submission!
Thanks. With regards to (1): The trashed cards are not supposed to share a type with the pile you picked, but among themselves. So you could trash 3 Coppers or 3 Estates or even 3 Shelters, but no mixes. In order to make this clearer I will swap the two instructions above the line. The reason to not just say "trash up to 3 cards" is that I want to ensure that there are times when you would prefer another trasher. Maybe it needs to be more restrictive still, I am not sure that Embargo tokens come into play enough with it yet. An option would be to only allow removing 1 token per play. Possibly I'll be posting a tweaked card later.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on October 31, 2018, 10:22:37 am
Here's my attempt at a card inspired by auction and price-setting games like Isle of Skye and The Castles of Mad King Ludwig:

(https://i.imgur.com/QJQUqFj.png)

It's wordier than I like for most cards, but I think it captures the price-setting mechanic as best as it can.  Not totally sure on the costs and the on-play effect (+3 Coffers might be too strong for $6), and I'm also not sold on being able to call it immediately after the turn you play it, (in games where this is the only way to gain Coffers, the first player to play it basically gets a free $5, which isn't super fun--making it so you can't open it helps some).  But in games with other Coffers cards, it can create some nice player interaction, where you want to hold onto Coffers in case someone else calls an auction.  Sometimes you might use this as a gainer, other times you might prefer to bait other players into boosting your Coffers for a bigger play later--just be careful not to get stuck paying for something you didn't really want.  Anyway, the idea definitely needs tweaking, but here's a stab at it. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on October 31, 2018, 11:08:04 am
Here's my attempt at a card inspired by auction and price-setting games like Isle of Skye and The Castles of Mad King Ludwig:

(https://i.imgur.com/QJQUqFj.png)

It's wordier than I like for most cards, but I think it captures the price-setting mechanic as best as it can.  Not totally sure on the costs and the on-play effect (+3 Coffers might be too strong for $6), and I'm also not sold on being able to call it immediately after the turn you play it, (in games where this is the only way to gain Coffers, the first player to play it basically gets a free $5, which isn't super fun--making it so you can't open it helps some).  But in games with other Coffers cards, it can create some nice player interaction, where you want to hold onto Coffers in case someone else calls an auction.  Sometimes you might use this as a gainer, other times you might prefer to bait other players into boosting your Coffers for a bigger play later--just be careful not to get stuck paying for something you didn't really want.  Anyway, the idea definitely needs tweaking, but here's a stab at it.
I don't like that this requires other players to have coffers. Couldn't they just pay in Debt?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on October 31, 2018, 11:59:05 am
Here's my attempt at a card inspired by auction and price-setting games like Isle of Skye and The Castles of Mad King Ludwig:

It's wordier than I like for most cards, but I think it captures the price-setting mechanic as best as it can.  Not totally sure on the costs and the on-play effect (+3 Coffers might be too strong for $6), and I'm also not sold on being able to call it immediately after the turn you play it, (in games where this is the only way to gain Coffers, the first player to play it basically gets a free $5, which isn't super fun--making it so you can't open it helps some).  But in games with other Coffers cards, it can create some nice player interaction, where you want to hold onto Coffers in case someone else calls an auction.  Sometimes you might use this as a gainer, other times you might prefer to bait other players into boosting your Coffers for a bigger play later--just be careful not to get stuck paying for something you didn't really want.  Anyway, the idea definitely needs tweaking, but here's a stab at it.
I don't like that this requires other players to have coffers. Couldn't they just pay in Debt?
I agree with this, I think it works better if each other player can always choose to gain the card. Also, another one of my favorite games (CoMKL) being done here!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 31, 2018, 12:58:20 pm
Here's my attempt at a card inspired by auction and price-setting games like Isle of Skye and The Castles of Mad King Ludwig:

(https://i.imgur.com/QJQUqFj.png)

It's wordier than I like for most cards, but I think it captures the price-setting mechanic as best as it can.  Not totally sure on the costs and the on-play effect (+3 Coffers might be too strong for $6), and I'm also not sold on being able to call it immediately after the turn you play it, (in games where this is the only way to gain Coffers, the first player to play it basically gets a free $5, which isn't super fun--making it so you can't open it helps some).  But in games with other Coffers cards, it can create some nice player interaction, where you want to hold onto Coffers in case someone else calls an auction.  Sometimes you might use this as a gainer, other times you might prefer to bait other players into boosting your Coffers for a bigger play later--just be careful not to get stuck paying for something you didn't really want.  Anyway, the idea definitely needs tweaking, but here's a stab at it.
Wow, that's a brilliant implementation of the price mechanism from Isle of Skye!
I think you could alleviate the "first to play Auction House gains a free $5" problem via adding "When you gain this, each other players gets +1 Coffers." This also makes the card, which you fear to be too strong, slightly weaker.
The only problem is that this would add even more text to an already text-intense card.

I don't like that this requires other players to have coffers. Couldn't they just pay in Debt?
This doesn't work as the active player is supposed to get the Coffers from the other player. He basically sets a buy price for everybody: she pays the bank respectively if somebody else wants the card they pay her.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 31, 2018, 01:02:07 pm
Well, that is a massive change to gameplay. It is not clear to me whether every player has their own decree tokens (I think they definitely should). I would try to avoid referencing Kingdom cards since that leads to many questions (like, how does this play with Black Market?). Action supply pile may be enough.

Yes, it would be a massive change, which gets to the heart of my initial concern. The idea was to have only 4 tokens total, shared by everyone, to mimic Temporum. There could be additional Decree tokens to make it less dominating. I also forgot to mention this card is absolutely un-playtested (yikes).

I initially referenced Action Supply piles, but that version was one line longer, and that was too much text for me. I forgot about the rules questions with Black Market, though. Hmm, sounds like I might just be better of coming up with a simpler, saner submission.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on October 31, 2018, 01:04:51 pm
Long time reader, first time submitter:

(https://i.imgur.com/R7Acq8v.png)

Quote
Decree: Action-Duration, $2
+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, you may move a Decree token to a Kingdom pile without one.

Setup: Put the 3 Decree tokens on Kingdom piles; non-Decree Kingdom cards from piles without Decree tokens cannot be played.

Temporum, originally a Dominion spin-off, has spun-on again. Only being able to visit 4 of 10 real Zones at a time is reimagined as only being able to play 4 of 10 Kingdom cards at time. The time-traveling theme didn't fit, but you can see the parallels by replacing "Decree token" with "Real Zone token", and the card name with "Change History". My main concern is this might be a must-buy in games using it. I appreciate any feedback!
This looks pretty harsh and might boil down to: "in games using this, play BM or lose".
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on October 31, 2018, 01:17:08 pm
Inspired by Star Realms, my second favorite deck building game, mostly due to it's simplicity.  I like that all you really do is directly hit your opponents health and they do the same to you. I know there are plenty of games that do this (Magic comes to mind first) but this is the one I play the most because my wife loves it.

This split pile has an aspect of that which sounds fun to me. You try to deal damage to your opponents and once you hit a certain point, you are rewarded.  The bottom f the pile allows you to "heal" if you desire. This also gets exciting in 3+ player games.

(https://i.imgur.com/MFdx86p.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/NJFKu7t.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Watno on October 31, 2018, 03:01:10 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/immS68p.jpg)

When you play a card from your hand, directly after you finish resolving it, you may replay it once per card copy of that card in your Clientele Mat.

It resembles how you get Clients with the Patron role in Glory to Rome. Similarly to the number of Clients you can have in GtR is limited by your influence, here it is limited by your provinces.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 31, 2018, 03:16:25 pm
Decree: Action-Duration, $2
+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, you may move a Decree token to a Kingdom pile without one.

Setup: Put the 3 Decree tokens on Kingdom piles; non-Decree Kingdom cards from piles without Decree tokens cannot be played.

This looks pretty harsh and might boil down to: "in games using this, play BM or lose".

Yeah. :/ I will try to get in a game or two with it, just to confirm, and then probably figure out a new submission instead.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on October 31, 2018, 05:48:48 pm
Based on Broom Service (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/172308/broom-service):
(https://i.imgur.com/GnCNX5D.jpg)
Quote
Root Gatherer
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. You may set aside a card from your hand face down. If you do, at the start of your next turn, reveal it and each other player reveals the cards they set aside with Root Gatherer cards. If you are the only player to reveal a copy of that card, put it into your hand and gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, discard it.

Haven a card in order to gain a card costing up to $5... unless someone else Havens a copy.  Feeling brave or will you play the cowardly Smithy?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on October 31, 2018, 05:59:12 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/GnCNX5D.jpg)
Quote
Root Gatherer
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. You may set aside a card from your hand face down. If you do, at the start of your next turn, reveal it and each other player reveals the cards they set aside with Root Gatherer cards. If you are the only player to reveal a copy of that card, put it into your hand and gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, discard it.

Haven a card in order to gain a card costing up to $5... unless someone else Havens a copy. Feeling brave or will you play the cowardly Smithy?

Which game is this based on?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Nflickner on October 31, 2018, 08:26:41 pm
Ok, there is a link to my card below--I couldn't figure out how to add the image correctly.  If anyone wants to fiddle with it and post it, please feel free, I was really struggling with it. 
Update is below.
It's inspired by Orleans, which is a game that wouldn't exist if it wasn't for Dominion, because it has taken the deck building dynamic and turned it into bag building, along with a lot of other elements.  This card will also come with a Boatman track, that will have six slots:  a beginning slot to place the players' boatman tokens and 5 other slots starting with a bonus of 1 victory token, progressively adding one more each time and ending in a bonus of 5 victory tokens. 

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Boatman&description=Each%20time%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20advance%20your%20boatsman%20marker%20once%20along%20the%20boatsman%20track.%20%20Receive%20the%20amount%20of%20%25%20indicated%20at%20each%20advancement.%20%20Once%20your%20marker%20has%20reached%20the%20end%20of%20the%20track%2C%20you%20may%20no%20longer%20buy%20this.%0A-%0AThis%20game%2C%20%25%20may%20be%20spent%20as%20%24%0A%0A&type=Event&credit=&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fcommons.wikimedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ACharon_and_Psyche.jpg%23%2Fmedia%2FFile%3ACharon_and_Psyche.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=1

This was the art I was trying to add to it, although it is not the best art it was hard to find good art for this card:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charon%27s_obol#/media/File:Charon_and_Psyche.jpg

Update:  With great help from crlundy, I've adjusted it so that it doesn't need a separate track, just a boatman mat. Below is the link to the improved version.   
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Boatman&description=If%20you%20have%204%20or%20fewer%20%25%20on%20your%20Boatman%20mat%2C%20add%201%25%20and%20then%20%2B1%25%20per%201%25%20on%20your%20mat.%20%20Return%20the%20%25%20on%20the%20mat%20at%20the%20end%20of%20the%20game.%0A-%0AIn%20games%20using%20this%2C%20at%20the%20start%20of%20your%20Buy%20phase%2C%20you%20may%20return%20%25%20you%20have%20for%20%2B1%20Coffers%20each.%0A&type=Event&credit=&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F4%2F4c%2FCharon_and_Psyche.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=1
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tarken on October 31, 2018, 08:38:09 pm
CHALLENGE #6: INSPIRED BY ANOTHER BOARD/CARD GAME

I was inspired by 7 Wonders game. In particular, its mechanic of getting cards.

My submission is:

(http://tarken.krakonos.org/dominion/LostWonder.png)

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on October 31, 2018, 09:00:42 pm
Ok, there is a link to my card below--I couldn't figure out how to add the image correctly.  If anyone wants to fiddle with it and post it, please feel free, I was really struggling with it.

Nflickner, here's a possible new version (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Boatsman&description=If%20you%20have%204%20of%20fewer%20%25%20on%20your%20Boatsman%20mat%2C%20add%201%25%20and%20then%20%2B1%25%20per%201%25%20on%20your%20mat.%0A-%0AIn%20games%20using%20this%2C%20at%20the%20start%20of%20your%20Buy%20phase%2C%20you%20may%20return%20%25%20you%20have%20for%20%2B1%20Coffers%20each.%0A%0A&type=Event&credit=&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F4%2F4c%2FCharon_and_Psyche.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=1). Without cropping, the art gets cut off. I also tweaked the wording (I didn't change your design; it should function the same), but it might feel less Orleans-y as I haven't played the game. Hope it helps!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Nflickner on October 31, 2018, 11:18:49 pm
Ok, there is a link to my card below--I couldn't figure out how to add the image correctly.  If anyone wants to fiddle with it and post it, please feel free, I was really struggling with it.

Nflickner, here's a possible new version (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Boatsman&description=If%20you%20have%204%20of%20fewer%20%25%20on%20your%20Boatsman%20mat%2C%20add%201%25%20and%20then%20%2B1%25%20per%201%25%20on%20your%20mat.%0A-%0AIn%20games%20using%20this%2C%20at%20the%20start%20of%20your%20Buy%20phase%2C%20you%20may%20return%20%25%20you%20have%20for%20%2B1%20Coffers%20each.%0A%0A&type=Event&credit=&price=%244&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2F4%2F4c%2FCharon_and_Psyche.jpg&color0=0&color1=0&size=1). Without cropping, the art gets cut off. I also tweaked the wording (I didn't change your design; it should function the same), but it might feel less Orleans-y as I haven't played the game. Hope it helps!

Thank you crlundy!  That was very helpful.  I just adjusted a couple things in the wording, but i think your wording is quite good!  Very thankful for your help :) 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on October 31, 2018, 11:48:57 pm
Inspired by Netrunner:
The first one imitates trace. (One player pays credits to increase his trace power, then opponent chooses either pay to exceed trace power, or suffer from the trace ability.)
And the latter two refer to Ice. (In Netrunner, defender builds firewalls named "Ice" to protect his servers from the Runners.)

Hired Blade
$5 Action - Attack
+3 cards
You may discard any treasure cards from your hand.
If you do, each opponent chooses one:
Discard that many treasures, or gain a curse.

Ice Wall
$5 Action - Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
+1 $
---
When another player gains a victory card, you may reveal this.
If you do, that player takes their -1 coin token.

Tax Station
$2 Action - Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
Move the +1 cost token to any pile.
(Cards from that pile cost 1 more on everyone's turns)
---
When any player buys a card from a pile with +1 cost token on it, you may reveal this and gain a coffer.

Clarification: There is only one +1 cost token in game.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 01, 2018, 03:27:13 am
Based on the resource accumulation spaces of Agricola:

(https://i.imgur.com/uKnEtRC.jpg)

Others have already stated it, but this is a nice, clean and simple design. I have not played Agricola so I am not familiar with how this mechanic works there, but in Dominion it may need a few tweaks to address some issues.

Here are my concerns:
(1) The opportunity cost does not seem high enough. When setting the price at $3, there is always going to be a number of Coins in the pile that makes that price worth taking it. Depending on the number of players, that magic number may always land on your turns or worse, your opponents. You could make the choice to take the token pile a lot harder by making a Curse gain the condition, similar to Defiled Shrine.
(2) I mentioned this briefly already, but the number of players will drastically alter how this plays. In a 6 player game, some players may never have a shot at getting a decent pile of Coins. You could make this scale less with more players or change what adds tokens all together.

I realize most of the ideas for these competitions are developed on the fly and are going to have issues that maybe are not worth fussing over (my cards certainly apply), but man this is a cool idea and I'd love to see it fleshed out. Thanks for sharing!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 01, 2018, 03:32:34 am
Dominion is not most boardgames, it is a boardgame. The fact that most humans like chocolate doesn't mean that one specific human does, and neither can you say what applies for Dominion. Rather, the fact that in all these years such a rule was never introduced speaks for itself.

I think within the past year, we did finally get a ruling that "can't trumps do" in Dominion...

Thread here (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=14887.msg653428#msg653428). (Was 2 years ago).
As Donald said, most people find this stuff pretty intuitive.
When I taught Dominion I never had to explicitly tell anybody the rules you mentioned in this old thread: card rules override general rules, can't trumps can, do as much as you can. The reason for this is the generality of such meta-rules in virtually all modern non-trivial card (i.e. not trick-taking but deckbuilding and LCG) games.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 01, 2018, 03:42:03 am
Based on the resource accumulation spaces of Agricola:

(https://i.imgur.com/uKnEtRC.jpg)

Others have already stated it, but this is a nice, clean and simple design. I have not played Agricola so I am not familiar with how this mechanic works there, but in Dominion it may need a few tweaks to address some issues.

Here are my concerns:
(1) The opportunity cost does not seem high enough. When setting the price at $3, there is always going to be a number of Coins in the pile that makes that price worth taking it. Depending on the number of players, that magic number may always land on your turns or worse, your opponents. You could make the choice to take the token pile a lot harder by making a Curse gain the condition, similar to Defiled Shrine.
Yeah, you are right, this should probably cost $4. I don't think that there is a "magic number" though, how attractive the Coin tokens are will change over the course of the game. Typically (of course it is more complex) in the opening you only want them to spike, in the middlegame you only want them if there are a lot because you still build and in the endgame you will take them more frequently because you don't need any more $3s (respectively $4s) for your deck.
I don't want to tie this to Curse buying as this would be unrelated to Agricola.

Quote
(2) I mentioned this briefly already, but the number of players will drastically alter how this plays. In a 6 player game, some players may never have a shot at getting a decent pile of Coins. You could make this scale less with more players or change what adds tokens all together.
I think that 4P Dominion is bad (little engine potential, some scale-sensitive cards like Ambassador are  broken) so I only play 2P and 3P. But even if somebody did something crazy like playing the game with 6 players, I don't think that there will be something like a fixed frequency of token gaining. As I tried to sketch out above, sometimes you have better things to do and something you will take this with very few tokens on it. Just like in Agricola.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 01, 2018, 03:51:55 am
Inspired by Star Realms, my second favorite deck building game, mostly due to it's simplicity.  I like that all you really do is directly hit your opponents health and they do the same to you. I know there are plenty of games that do this (Magic comes to mind first) but this is the one I play the most because my wife loves it.

This split pile has an aspect of that which sounds fun to me. You try to deal damage to your opponents and once you hit a certain point, you are rewarded.  The bottom f the pile allows you to "heal" if you desire. This also gets exciting in 3+ player games.

(https://i.imgur.com/MFdx86p.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/NJFKu7t.png)

I tried for some time to incorporate a healthbar like feature into Dominion, but never got anywhere with it. I even considered making it a challenge if I ever won one of these things. Nice to see someone else having a go at it!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 01, 2018, 04:01:25 am
I think it's worth mentioning that the same game can be covered multiple times. No one really wants to not go first, but that shouldn't stop people from submitting their own takes. There is usually a lot of design space in games and a lot of different aspects can be ported over to Dominion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 01, 2018, 05:01:56 am

Catan Cards :)

Heavily inspired by the Development Cards of 鉄ettlers of Catan, adding a similar amount of secret weapons.

Setup+ Rules

Each player has a Catan mat. The pile of Catan Cards is a face down Kingdom Pile. When you buy a Catan card (for 5$), you put it face down on your catan mat.
Only you may look at your catan cards whenever you want. Once per turn, you may call a catan card in your action phase whenever you are not resolving an action, turning it face up. It doesn稚 take up an action. Once a Catan Card is face up, you are no longer allowed to play it again.

There are 25 Catan Cards: 14 Catanians (couldn稚 name them 適nights ...), 2 Monopols, 2 Progress, 2 Road Building, 5 Peninsula.

There are 12 Handicap cards, 3 of each. Like Miserable, Handicaps lay in front of each player. Handicaps stack.

Also, Catanians can get the artifact 撤alace of Catan (see below).


HANDICAPS

Treasure Handicap
Whenever you gain a treasure, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Victory Handicap
Whenever you gain a victory card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Action Handicap
Whenever you gain an action card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Trashing Handicap
Whenever you trash a card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.


CATAN CARDS

Catanians, ACTION, 5$
Return your handicaps to their pile.
Each opponent takes a handicap, putting it face up in front of him.

Monopol, ACTION, 5$
Name a treasure. Each opponent reveals his hand and plays all the treasures you named, counting the $ for you.

Progress, ACTION, 5$
Gain an action card and play it.

Railroad, ACTION, 5$
+2 buys
Name a card. This turn, every copy of this card costs 2 less.

Peninsula, VICTORY, 5$
4 VP


Palace of Catan (Artifact)

Take this if you have called at least 3 Catanians and more than any other player.
8 VP



Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on November 01, 2018, 05:46:18 am
Well this idea I know shows up in other board games (to name an example, Lifeboat), so I may as well put it in here. For those who saw my first take on it, the cards are a bit different now:

Weather
Cycling start-of-turn effects. Shuffle these 12 cards, and put them face down except the top one. Then at the start of each round of turns, discard the top one (like you discard Boons), and turn the next one over if there are still cards in the pile; each player gets the discarded effect immediately at the start of their turn, whilst knowing the Weather for next turn. When the pile is all discarded and you need to reveal another Weather, shuffle it into a new pile to continue. With the Changing Weather, you get 2 effects coming at once. The Milds are there to tone things down a bit.
(https://i.imgur.com/fhIgoZA.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/fttuG8h.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/jNB6N4m.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/GrSUSE2.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/PqmyCKJ.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/OjOypRA.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/WfLzdDz.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/TskHAbC.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/C4v7kjU.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/sJUcfDM.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/sJUcfDM.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/pvMo2AB.jpg)
Quote
Sunny - +1 Card
Windy - +1 Action
Cloudy - +1 Buy
Showery - + $1
Rainy - if you have 4 or more cards in your hand, take one and put it anywhere in your deck.
Stormy - when you play your first Action this turn, get +1 Card and +1 Action instead of following its instructions.
Snowy - this turn, cards (everywhere) cost $1 more.
Dry - this turn, cards you gain are put onto your deck.
Foggy - gain a Copper.
Mild x2 - nothing, normal turn
Changing - set this and the next two Weathers aside, then discard them. For this turn, each player gets both Weathers in the order they were set aside in.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LaLight on November 01, 2018, 05:59:02 am
Weather

funny, I had that 2 years ago: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16250.0

it was not inspired by any games though. And I like yours much, much better.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 01, 2018, 06:51:45 am
I know Carcassonne has been done already, but:

I got a bit carried away with the idea of cards that keep other cards in play next to them, and this turned into a bit of a mini-Expansion.

(https://i.imgur.com/E3aQC7M.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/cz4nsqO.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/kz6QH5k.jpg)(https://i.imgur.com/JLZprzw.jpg)

General clarification: During cleanup, cards "next to" another card stay in play if that card does.  Only cards played as part of a card's effect count as cards "next to" that card.  Merely putting a card next to it on the table isn't enough. 

Quote
Cloister
Cost: $8
Types: Action - Duration - Victory
Now and at the start of each of your turns: If this is in play, you may play a non-Duration Action card from your hand, putting it into play next to this card. If there are eight cards next to this card, discard this and all cards next to it, and +9VP.
-
At the end of the game, if this is in play, it is worth 1VP plus 1VP for each card next to it.

Quote
Field
Cost: $6
Types: Action - Duration - Victory
Put Victory card from your hand into play next to this card.
At the start of each of your turns, you may put a copy of that card into play next to this card.
-
At the end of the game, if you have the most copies of that card in play next to this card, this card is worth 1% per copy.

Clarification: In the case of a tie, all tied cards score.

Quote
Road
Cost: $5
Types: Action - Duration
Play up to two non-Duration Actions from your hand, putting them into play next to this card.
At the start of each of your turns, you may play a non-Duration Action from your hand, putting it into play next to this card.  If you do not, discard this and all cards next to it, and +1 Action per card that was next to it.

Quote
City Walls
Cost: $4
Types: Action - Duration
Now and at the start of each of your turns: If this is in play, you may play a Treasure from your hand, putting it into play next to this card. If it is worth $6 or more, +2VP. If you do not, discard this and all cards next to it, and +$1 per card that was next to it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 01, 2018, 08:08:59 am

Catan Cards :)

Heavily inspired by the Development Cards of 鉄ettlers of Catan, adding a similar amount of secret weapons.

Setup+ Rules

Each player has a Catan mat. The pile of Catan Cards is a face down Kingdom Pile. When you buy a Catan card (for 5$), you put it face down on your catan mat.
Only you may look at your catan cards whenever you want. Once per turn, you may call a catan card in your action phase whenever you are not resolving an action, turning it face up. It doesn稚 take up an action. Once a Catan Card is face up, you are no longer allowed to play it again.

There are 25 Catan Cards: 14 Catanians (couldn稚 name them 適nights ...), 2 Monopols, 2 Progress, 2 Road Building, 5 Peninsula.

There are 12 Handicap cards, 3 of each. Like Miserable, Handicaps lay in front of each player. Handicaps stack.

Also, Catanians can get the artifact 撤alace of Catan (see below).


HANDICAPS

Treasure Handicap
Whenever you gain a treasure, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Victory Handicap
Whenever you gain a victory card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Action Handicap
Whenever you gain an action card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.

Trashing Handicap
Whenever you trash a card, take 1 debt.
This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian.


CATAN CARDS

Catanians, ACTION, 5$
Return your handicaps to their pile.
Each opponent takes a handicap, putting it face up in front of him.

Monopol, ACTION, 5$
Name a treasure. Each opponent reveals his hand and plays all the treasures you named, counting the $ for you.

Progress, ACTION, 5$
Gain an action card and play it.

Railroad, ACTION, 5$
+2 buys
Name a card. This turn, every copy of this card costs 2 less.

Peninsula, VICTORY, 5$
4 VP


Palace of Catan (Artifact)

Take this if you have called at least 3 Catanians and more than any other player.
8 VP
Really cool! The Catan cards would seem maybe a bit too strong for $5, except for the fact that you wouldn't know which one you're getting. One little thing: You don't need to say 'This stays in front of you until you play a Catanian' on the Handicaps and also say 'Return your handicaps to their pile' on the Catanians.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 01, 2018, 08:50:06 am
Power Grid!

(https://i.imgur.com/uJgef53.png)

(https://i.imgur.com/huBh7wl.png) (https://i.imgur.com/L1qay0x.png) (https://i.imgur.com/fhv0uZc.png) (https://i.imgur.com/ZjEEUND.png) (https://i.imgur.com/DUbQVLa.png) (https://i.imgur.com/i3lWiOx.png) (https://i.imgur.com/2XNUqPB.png) (https://i.imgur.com/2XNUqPB.png) (https://i.imgur.com/AyMrVFs.png) (https://i.imgur.com/p7672ef.png)

Note 1: Yes, "Powerhouse" should probably be a type, but it just gets sooooo tiny to have it say "Artifact - Powerhouse" in that otherwise brilliant card image generator.
Note 2: Yes, Landmarks technically need to care about VP. But Friedemann Friese loves the color green, so I couldn't bear doing it any other way. Outside of this context, I probably would have done it as an "Edict". Here's an Event version, anyhow:
(https://i.imgur.com/qe9Jfma.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: silvern on November 01, 2018, 02:17:59 pm
I wanted to design a card that reflected the simplicity and subtle versatility of my favorite chess piece.
Don't know how well it turned out....tell me what you think!
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/0/0f/20150603215703%21Pawn.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 01, 2018, 02:27:22 pm
I wanted to design a card that reflected the simplicity and subtle versatility of my favorite chess piece.
Don't know how well it turned out....tell me what you think!
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/archive/0/0f/20150603215703%21Pawn.jpg)
Astonishingly unique and different from any card I've ever seen! This is easily the winning entry.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 01, 2018, 03:58:20 pm
Catan Card - Monopol(y): Are the played Treasures returned to the player's hand afterwards or are they discarded?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 01, 2018, 05:43:43 pm
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on November 01, 2018, 06:24:19 pm
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Assuming you already have an image file, best bet is to upload it to a hosting site like imgur, then link with the <img> tag (but with [] instead of <>). If you use the "quote" button on a post that contains images, you'll see the exact code used to insert them.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 01, 2018, 06:31:44 pm
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Here's one way:
1. Save it to your computer
2. Go to imgur and upload the image
3. Optional, but highly suggested: resize the image to around 500 pixels
4. Right-click it and click 'copy image address.
5. To insert the image here, click the image icon while posting a reply. This text will appear: (img)(/img) but with [ ] instead of ( ). Paste the image address inside.
6. Add this inside the first set of brackets like this: (img width=255) or any other number around there, but not in bold.
I started typing this before ConMan replied, but thought it would a shame to waste it  :).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 01, 2018, 06:34:46 pm
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Here's one way:
1. Save it to your computer
2. Go to imgur and upload the image
3. Optional, but highly suggested: resize the image to around 500 pixels
4. Right-click it and click 'copy image address.
5. To insert the image here, click the image icon while posting a reply. This text will appear: (img)(/img) but with [ ] instead of ( ). Paste the image address inside.
6. Add this inside the first set of brackets like this: (img width=255) or any other number around there, but not in bold.
I started typing this before ConMan replied, but thought it would a shame to waste it  :).


Thanks but is there any way to do it on an iPad?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on November 01, 2018, 08:06:29 pm
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Here's one way:
1. Save it to your computer
2. Go to imgur and upload the image
3. Optional, but highly suggested: resize the image to around 500 pixels
4. Right-click it and click 'copy image address.
5. To insert the image here, click the image icon while posting a reply. This text will appear: (img)(/img) but with [ ] instead of ( ). Paste the image address inside.
6. Add this inside the first set of brackets like this: (img width=255) or any other number around there, but not in bold.
I started typing this before ConMan replied, but thought it would a shame to waste it  :).


Thanks but is there any way to do it on an iPad?
Usually press-and-hold has a similar effect to right-clicking on a computer.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GreyEK on November 02, 2018, 02:40:15 am
Inspired by Agricola

(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/479797320419115029/507805858957361171/elder.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on November 02, 2018, 04:29:40 am
Inspired by Arkham Horror

(https://i.imgur.com/MQAntZV.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 02, 2018, 08:50:10 am
I know this is not the right place to post this but I am a Forum Dominion Strategy noob. How do I post images of my cards?
Here's one way:
1. Save it to your computer
2. Go to imgur and upload the image
3. Optional, but highly suggested: resize the image to around 500 pixels
4. Right-click it and click 'copy image address.
5. To insert the image here, click the image icon while posting a reply. This text will appear: (img)(/img) but with [ ] instead of ( ). Paste the image address inside.
6. Add this inside the first set of brackets like this: (img width=255) or any other number around there, but not in bold.
I started typing this before ConMan replied, but thought it would a shame to waste it  :).


Thanks but is there any way to do it on an iPad?
You can at least post the text of your card so as not to miss out on the contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 02, 2018, 08:51:36 am
Inspired by Arkham Horror

(https://i.imgur.com/MQAntZV.jpg)
Are you supposed to be allowed to discard a curse and take 2VP if that's all that is there? Really neat card, I like having another forced-cooperative thing going on.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on November 02, 2018, 12:40:56 pm
Quote
Root Gatherer
Types: Action, Duration
Cost: $6
+3 Cards. You may set aside a card from your hand face down. If you do, at the start of your next turn, reveal it and each other player reveals the cards they set aside with Root Gatherer cards. If you are the only player to reveal a copy of that card, put it into your hand and gain a card costing up to $5. Otherwise, discard it.

Haven a card in order to gain a card costing up to $5... unless someone else Havens a copy. Feeling brave or will you play the cowardly Smithy?

Which game is this based on?
Root Gatherer is based on the Kennerspiel winner Broom Service (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/172308/broom-service), a pick-up-and-deliver game. In Broom Service, each round all players simultaneously and secretly choose a set of all possible actions to take and then players take turns playing those actions they chose.
Each action can either be played cowardly or can be played bravely. The brave version of the action is bigger and better, but if anyone else takes the same action bravely after you, then you lose the action--and the next player can lose it if another player does the same and so on. You must predict what actions players will take, and time your brave actions so they cannot be lost (and to usurp their brave actions).

Auction House
Types: Action, Reserve
Cost: $6
+3 Coffers. Put this on your Tavern mat.
After you turn, you may call this to put any number of tokens from your Coffers on a card in the Supply costing up to $5. Each other player may pay you that number of tokens to gain that card (you keep your tokens). If no one does, you gain the card, and pay your tokens.
This is a great use of set-pricing. I would rather it use debt tokens for ease of access, though it would need some kind of catch so that you can't use Auction House to gain cards while you have debt. I am curious if it even needs a cost restriction for the card it targets. Is being able to auction Provinces too much of an issue?

Trebuchet
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $3
+$2. Each other player takes a damage token. When a player has 5 damage tokens, they immediately discard them all, and then discard down to 3 cards in hand. If they did, +3VP.
Reconstruct
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it; or remove 2 damage tokens for +$2; or gain a card from the trash costing from $3 to $6.
I'm not sure if this is balanced, but I am interested. My chief concern is the desynched player damage in multiplayer games will result in VP distributing wrongly in spiky fashion. Even if I give Player B 4 damage, if Player C plays the next Trebuchet then they get the VP.

Cosmic Horror
Types: Landmark
At the end of your Buy phase, you may discard a Curse from your hand to take 3VP from here. At the end of your turn, put 1VP on this. If there are at least 8VP per player on this, the game ends.
This is cute. I like the way it incentivizes getting some form of cheap-gaining or +buy early so you can pick up a Curse to start generating VP from it. I don't like the way it pulls so many VP from it that if any one player is removing VP it seems unlikely to become an end condition. I'd like to see some games of this to see if 8VP per player is the key threshold value.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on November 02, 2018, 01:57:53 pm
Are you supposed to be allowed to discard a curse and take 2VP if that's all that is there?

By general Dominion rules, yes. Even if there's 0(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) on the card, you can use the ability to discard a Curse and take nothing. Just like playing a Smithy when you only have 0, 1, or 2 cards left in your deck/discard. Or, more similarly, you can call a Ratcatcher even if you have no cards in your hand to trash.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on November 03, 2018, 03:31:31 am
Let's try this again; I'm replacing my previous un-fun submission. (This one might still be bad, let's find out.)

(https://i.imgur.com/lgbZOvX.png)

I'm sticking with Temporum, but this time going for the concept of ruling Times. Here, your bonus for ruling a pile is on-buy VP; it's an Adventures token Event variant. Each player gets Coronet tokens in their player color. Let's say they each get 10, like Temporum, but they probably don't need that many. You can use the crowns that come with Temporum, even.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 03, 2018, 06:51:02 am
Let's try this again; I'm replacing my previous un-fun submission. (This one might still be bad, let's find out.)

(https://i.imgur.com/lgbZOvX.png)

I'm sticking with Temporum, but this time going for the concept of ruling Times. Here, your bonus for ruling a pile is on-buy VP; it's an Adventures token Event variant. Each player gets Coronet tokens in their player color. Let's say they each get 10, like Temporum, but they probably don't need that many. You can use the crowns that come with Temporum, even.
I like this idea. It is very possible that you'd have to do some amount of tweaking on cost and reward for the most interesting play. I would consider restricting this to non-Victory cards since putting the tokens on e.g. Distant Lands seems too automatic.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 03, 2018, 08:22:26 am
(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/Oshw6CxS3AJq.png)

Guess Who
Type: Action
Cost: $4

+1 Card +1 Action

Secretly pick a card from the Randomizer cards used for this kingdom. Do this twice: The player to your left asks a yes/no question, you have to truly answer. After answering the second question, he guesses the picked card. If he's wrong, gain a copy of the picked card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 03, 2018, 11:02:30 am
Let's try this again; I'm replacing my previous un-fun submission. (This one might still be bad, let's find out.)

(https://i.imgur.com/lgbZOvX.png)

I'm sticking with Temporum, but this time going for the concept of ruling Times. Here, your bonus for ruling a pile is on-buy VP; it's an Adventures token Event variant. Each player gets Coronet tokens in their player color. Let's say they each get 10, like Temporum, but they probably don't need that many. You can use the crowns that come with Temporum, even.
Cool! I think this is much better than your other one. Wording suggestion: If no player has more Coronet tokens on it than you, +2VP.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gamer3000 on November 03, 2018, 11:58:59 am
Let's try this again; I'm replacing my previous un-fun submission. (This one might still be bad, let's find out.)

(https://i.imgur.com/lgbZOvX.png)

I'm sticking with Temporum, but this time going for the concept of ruling Times. Here, your bonus for ruling a pile is on-buy VP; it's an Adventures token Event variant. Each player gets Coronet tokens in their player color. Let's say they each get 10, like Temporum, but they probably don't need that many. You can use the crowns that come with Temporum, even.
Did you want this to get VP even if there are no tokens on the pile?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on November 03, 2018, 01:21:21 pm
I like this idea. It is very possible that you'd have to do some amount of tweaking on cost and reward for the most interesting play. I would consider restricting this to non-Victory cards since putting the tokens on e.g. Distant Lands seems too automatic.

Non-Victory is a good call.

Did you want this to get VP even if there are no tokens on the pile?

No I do not, so the current wording needs some tweaks.

Cool! I think this is much better than your other one. Wording suggestion: If no player has more Coronet tokens on it than you, +2VP.

Thanks! I hate wordy cards, so I'm looking for every corner I can cut, to incorporate those other changes.

This version barely still fits on 3 lines. Any loopholes here?

Quote
Coronation: Event, $3
Move any Coronet token of yours to a non-Victory Action Supply pile. (When you buy a card from that pile, if you have any Coronet tokens on it and no other player has more, +2VP.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on November 03, 2018, 04:35:33 pm
Do this twice: The player to your left asks a yes/no question, you have to truly answer.
This is significantly closer to a Truth or Dare card than I was expecting we'd get.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 03, 2018, 05:40:29 pm
Do this twice: The player to your left asks a yes/no question, you have to truly answer.
This is significantly closer to a Truth or Dare card than I was expecting we'd get.

I tried to compress the text on the card. It was not so easy (English is not my native language) and yes, you may actually ask Truth or Dare questions, if you want.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on November 03, 2018, 08:47:03 pm
Here's one I've had for a while based on Agricola:
Agriculture
$5 Action - Duration
You may set aside a non-Victory card from your hand.  If you do, gain a copy of that card, setting it aside with that card.
At the start of each of your turns, put one of those cards into your hand.

Note: It gets discarded at the end of the turn when it gives you the last card (the second turn after playing it).  If you don't set anything aside, it gets discarded at the end of the turn you play it (like Haven) and has no real effect.  When throned, you can set aside two cards (or three with King's Court), make a separate pile for each, and take one card from each pile at the start of each turn (per the FAQ on Archive).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on November 04, 2018, 01:21:58 am
When throned, you can set aside two cards and take two cards per turn into hand (unintuitively for those who've played Agricola, you can take both copies of one card on the first turn and both copies of the other on your second turn, or even set aside only one card and take both copies into hand on your next turn; I couldn't find any way to "fix" this that wasn't unnecessarily complex).

Based on how Archive works (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Archive#FAQ), yours should work the intuitive Agricola-y way: "If you Throne Room an [Agriculture], keep the sets of cards separate; you get one from each each turn". You could tweak the wording to be more like Archive. Also, the second sentence should probably say "if you do".

Agriculture would be really fun with Potion and Debt cards, for the free copy!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on November 04, 2018, 02:58:03 pm
When throned, you can set aside two cards and take two cards per turn into hand (unintuitively for those who've played Agricola, you can take both copies of one card on the first turn and both copies of the other on your second turn, or even set aside only one card and take both copies into hand on your next turn; I couldn't find any way to "fix" this that wasn't unnecessarily complex).

Based on how Archive works (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Archive#FAQ), yours should work the intuitive Agricola-y way: "If you Throne Room an [Agriculture], keep the sets of cards separate; you get one from each each turn". You could tweak the wording to be more like Archive. Also, the second sentence should probably say "if you do".

Agriculture would be really fun with Potion and Debt cards, for the free copy!
Thanks!  I hadn't seen the ruling on Archive; I'll reword my card accordingly.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 04, 2018, 04:23:05 pm
Old:
Quote
Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 04, 2018, 04:27:50 pm
Old:
Quote
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=D%26D&description=%2B1%20Action%0ARoll%202d4.%20For%20each%20die%2C%20if%20it%20was%20a%3A%0A1%2C%20%2B1%20Card%0A2%2C%20%2B1%20Action%0A3%2C%20%2B1%20Buy%0A4%2C%20%2B%20%241&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%242&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
Action, cost $2
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on November 04, 2018, 04:38:53 pm
Everything is great so far, y'all! Keep it up! I really enjoy this theme so I wanted to give some love to some games that haven't popped up yet, though obviously I can't vote for myself and all that:

Betrayal at House on the Hill: (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Betrayal&description=When%20you%20buy%20this%2C%20%2B%20%248%20per%20Estate%20on%20your%20Tavern%20mat.%0A%0AWhenever%20anyone%20gains%20a%20Victory%20card%2C%0Aif%20you%20have%20no%20debt%2C%20%2B2%25.&type=Project&credit=Illustration%3A%20Marion%20Rose&price=%4040&preview=&type2=Heirloom%3A%20Omen&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fd13egrxi1n6w2z.cloudfront.net%2F719_887543l%2Bv%3D201205170414c%2Fthe-burning-of-the-robinhood-mill.jpg&color0=15&color1=0&size=1): (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Omen&description=%241%0A%0APut%20an%20Estate%20from%20your%20hand%20on%20your%20Tavern%20mat.%0AIf%20you%20do%2C%20%2B%20%241.&type=Treasure%20-%20Heirloom&credit=Illustration%3A%20Marion%20Rose&price=%242&preview=%241&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.fineartamerica.com%2Fimages%2Fartworkimages%2Fmediumlarge%2F1%2Flone-raven-marion-rose.jpg&color0=1&color1=0&size=0)
(https://i.imgur.com/vfDnfnf.png)
Estates on the mat stand in for BaHotH's omen cards leading to the haunt roll becoming ever more likely to succeed.

Coup: (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Closed%20Session&description=If%20the%20Curse%20supply%20pile%20is%20not%20empty%2C%20the%20first%20card%20you%20play%20from%20your%20hand%20each%0Aturn%20may%20be%20played%20face%20down%20and%20you%20name%20what%20card%20you%20are%20playing%20it%20as.%0AAny%20other%20player%20may%20choose%20to%20reveal%20the%20face%20down%20card.%20If%20it%20was%20the%20named%0Acard%2C%20they%20gain%20a%20Curse%3B%20if%20not%2C%20you%20gain%20a%20Curse%20and%20the%20played%20card%20has%20no%20effect.&type=Project&credit=Illustration%3A%20Juan%20Pantoja%20de%20la%20Cruz&price=%245&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2F9%2F9b%2FThe_Somerset_House_Conference_19_August_1604.jpg%2F796px-The_Somerset_House_Conference_19_August_1604.jpg&color0=15&color1=0&size=1)
(https://i.imgur.com/W4jLfEQ.png)
Here "playing it as" is shorthand for the full Overlord/BoM effect. Initially this was just a Landmark, but I decided to make it an expensive Project instead, so it doesn't start slowing down the game until people have a greater variety of cards in their decks.

Terraforming Mars: (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=New%20Horizons&description=If%20there%20are%20fewer%20than%20ten%20supply%20piles%3A%20gain%20a%20Province%2C%20draw%20four%20randomizer%20cards%2C%20choose%20one%20of%20them%2C%20and%20add%20the%20corresponding%20supply%20pile%20to%20the%20kingdom%2C%20performing%20any%20necessary%20setup.%20Return%20the%20randomizer%20cards%20to%20the%20bottom%20of%20their%20deck.%0A%0A-%0A%0ASetup%3A%20In%20games%20using%20this%2C%20begin%20the%20the%20game%20with%20only%20six%20supply%20piles%20instead%20of%20ten.&type=Event&credit=Illustration%3A%20Pascal%20Lee&price=%247&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pascallee.net%2Fs%2Fcc_images%2Fteaserbox_888703263.jpg%3Ft%3D1420332367&color0=0&color1=0&size=1)
(https://i.imgur.com/SHkDvob.png)
A few different Terraforming Mars mechanics found their way into this... cards that can't be played until the planet has gotten warm/wet/airy enough, special cheaper ways of acquiring basic resources, and drawing four cards for your research phase. If Young Witch turns up then I guess this only can be used three times instead of four. Not sure how "performing any necessary setup" would interact with cards with heirlooms, though.

Tzolk'in: (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Great%20Wheel&description=%2B1%20Card%0A%2B1%20Action%0APut%20this%20on%20your%20Tavern%20mat.%0A%0A-%0A%0AIf%20this%20is%20on%20your%20Tavern%20mat%20at%20the%20start%20of%20your%20turn%2C%20choose%20one%3A%20discard%20one%20or%20two%20cards%20from%20your%20hand%20for%20%2B1%20Coffers%20per%20card%20discarded%2C%20or%20call%20this%20and%20spend%20any%20number%20of%20Coffers%20to%20gain%20and%20play%20an%20Action%20card%20with%20that%20exact%20cost.&type=Action%20-%20Reserve&credit=&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ancient-origins.net%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Ffield%2Fimage%2FCalendar.jpg&color0=5&color1=0&size=0)
(https://i.imgur.com/EWJ3RpV.png)
Tzolk'in's main mechanic of getting more powerful effects by leaving things on the board for longer, but having your options somewhat reduced in the meantime. At first I had the coin tokens sit on the card itself instead of the Coffers mat, but decided the latter would be more interesting, at which point this turned into a Candlestick Maker variant.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 04, 2018, 05:10:56 pm
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

Quote
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)

I played with that card and we thought that it was too strong. It should cost $ 4, because every play is literally:

+ ス Card
+ 1 ス Action
+ ス $
+ ス Buy

In the worst case, this is +1 Action +2 Buys, but it is often a Lab or a Peddler, which are both very strong cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 04, 2018, 05:52:33 pm
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

Quote
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)

I played with that card and we thought that it was too strong. It should cost $ 4, because every play is literally:

+ ス Card
+ 1 ス Action
+ ス $
+ ス Buy

In the worst case, this is +1 Action +2 Buys, but it is often a Lab or a Peddler, which are both very strong cards.

If you playtested this card, I will accept your insight and tips. Thank you.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Erick648 on November 04, 2018, 05:59:15 pm
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

Quote
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)

I played with that card and we thought that it was too strong. It should cost $ 4, because every play is literally:

+ ス Card
+ 1 ス Action
+ ス $
+ ス Buy

In the worst case, this is +1 Action +2 Buys, but it is often a Lab or a Peddler, which are both very strong cards.
I disagree.  Maybe you got some lucky rolls, but it looks to me like overall, it's pretty weak.  Specifically, it has the following probabilities:

12.5% chance each of:
Village (+1 Card, +2 Actions)
Market Square (+1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy)
Peddler (+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1)
Necropolis-with-buy (+2 Actions, +1 Buy)
non-duration Fishing Village (+2 Actions, +$1)
Pouch-as-an-action (+1 Action, +1 Buy, +$1)

6.25% chance each of:
Laboratory (+2 Cards, +1 Action)
failed first Crossroads (+3 Actions)
non-terminal Buys (+1 Action, +2 Buys)
virtual Silver (+1 Action, +$2)

While the Laboratory effect is strong, it only happens 1 in 16 times.  Most of these effects would be balanced on a $2-3 card, and some wouldn't even be worth $2.  And then you need to discount it for being random (since you won't always get the effect you want and will sometimes get Actions or Buys when you have no use for them). 

On average, playing two of these will give the same effect as playing Village+Market Square, only with more unpredictability (and without the option of using Market Square's reaction).  Given that the unpredictability is a bad thing rather than a good thing (since it makes it much harder to work the card into an overall strategy), I'd probably price it at $2, or possibly [3debt] (since having a debt-only card makes it easier to use the +Buys if you get them at an inconvenient time).  Certainly, I don't think it should cost more than $3, since two of these are pretty clearly worse than a Village plus a Market Square (both of which cost $3).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 04, 2018, 09:04:54 pm
Old:
Quote
College Education (Pays homage to Life)
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=College%20Education&description=%2B1%20Buy%0ATake%20Educated.&type=Event&credit=Google%20Images&price=%405&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=1
Quote
Event (cost $2)
+1 Buy
Take Educated.
Here is educated:
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Educated&description=At%20the%20start%20of%20your%20turn%2C%20%2B1%25&type=State&credit=Google%20Images&price=&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=13&color1=0&size=1

Quote
At the start of your turn, +1 VP
I think it can be relatively cheap because all the players will be constantly fighting over it. Also it costs 5 debt, one for each bank loan you take at the start of the Life game if you choose college.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 04, 2018, 11:23:25 pm
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

Quote
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)

I played with that card and we thought that it was too strong. It should cost $ 4, because every play is literally:

+ ス Card
+ 1 ス Action
+ ス $
+ ス Buy

In the worst case, this is +1 Action +2 Buys, but it is often a Lab or a Peddler, which are both very strong cards.
I disagree.  Maybe you got some lucky rolls, but it looks to me like overall, it's pretty weak.  Specifically, it has the following probabilities:

12.5% chance each of:
Village (+1 Card, +2 Actions)
Market Square (+1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy)
Peddler (+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1)
Necropolis-with-buy (+2 Actions, +1 Buy)
non-duration Fishing Village (+2 Actions, +$1)
Pouch-as-an-action (+1 Action, +1 Buy, +$1)

6.25% chance each of:
Laboratory (+2 Cards, +1 Action)
failed first Crossroads (+3 Actions)
non-terminal Buys (+1 Action, +2 Buys)
virtual Silver (+1 Action, +$2)

While the Laboratory effect is strong, it only happens 1 in 16 times.  Most of these effects would be balanced on a $2-3 card, and some wouldn't even be worth $2.  And then you need to discount it for being random (since you won't always get the effect you want and will sometimes get Actions or Buys when you have no use for them). 

On average, playing two of these will give the same effect as playing Village+Market Square, only with more unpredictability (and without the option of using Market Square's reaction).  Given that the unpredictability is a bad thing rather than a good thing (since it makes it much harder to work the card into an overall strategy), I'd probably price it at $2, or possibly [3debt] (since having a debt-only card makes it easier to use the +Buys if you get them at an inconvenient time).  Certainly, I don't think it should cost more than $3, since two of these are pretty clearly worse than a Village plus a Market Square (both of which cost $3).

Since I was strangely curious, I'm going to try to calculate the cost with more accuracy:

12.5% chance each of:
Village (+1 Card, +2 Actions) - $3.
Market Square (+1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Buy) - I think MS without the reaction would only be worth $2, really. How many cantrip +Buys do you really want, normally?
Peddler (+1 Card, +1 Action, +$1) $4 - One of the strongest effects.
Necropolis-with-buy (+2 Actions, +1 Buy) - Barely better than regular Necropolis. $1.5 at most.
non-duration Fishing Village (+2 Actions, +$1) - Squire with fewer options. Given that you'll pick this option the vast majority of the time anyway, I'll be generous and give it $2.
Pouch-as-an-action (+1 Action, +1 Buy, +$1) - Pouch is $2, but honestly, given that I gave Buycropolis only +$0.5 for its +Buy, this should really only be $0.5.

6.25% chance each of:
Laboratory (+2 Cards, +1 Action) - Far and away the best outcome - $5
failed first Crossroads (+3 Actions) - Removing the draw possibility takes away everything even remotely attractive about Crossroads at $2. - $1.5 for you.
non-terminal Buys (+1 Action, +2 Buys) - Just terrible. $0.5.
virtual Silver (+1 Action, +$2) - $3, which at this point is looking shockingly good.

Overall, this is looking even weaker than the above estimate. The final outcome is .125*(3+2+4+1.5+2+0.5) + .0625*(5+1.5+0.5+3) = 2.25. Subtract $0.25 for the randomness and we get an even $2.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 05, 2018, 02:09:16 am
You have to count Peddler as $4.5, because Poacher already costs $4. Pouch-as-an-action is definitely a $2, if you compare it to Pawn and Candlestick Maker. The disappearing Silver is probably a $3.5.

But overall you seem to be right. The problem is that this card is a very unsteady Pawn variant, but usually better than Pawn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: singletee on November 05, 2018, 03:00:03 am
Ok, I'm throwing my hat into the ring.

Here are four cards inspired by the four special cards in Tichu:

(https://imgur.com/JVXsoVm.jpg) (https://imgur.com/v8ntn7d.jpg) (https://imgur.com/aajycOh.jpg) (https://imgur.com/Ilwi08I.jpg)

The Little Bird rewards you for correctly guessing a card in the next player's hand. It only works once because they have to reveal to confirm your guess, and after that it would be trivial to get the bonus.

Dominion players are well aware of the principle that one great thing is better than two good things. This is the case in Tichu as well, and the Dog is a card that weakens your own hand but strengthens your partner's. Cards that hurt your current turn to help the next one are a well-explored design space in Dominion, so I had some trouble creating something new. While making this card I kept reinventing Gear, Tactician, and Secret Cave. In the end I settled on a gainer. The synergy with Faithful Hound is a nice bonus.

Phoenix is a wish you can buy! Tichu's Phoenix is a wild card worth negative points, so you get a curse when you play this.

The mighty Dragon has a powerful effect and is worth points, but you don't get to keep him when you play him! This Dragon is a little nicer; you can appease him by feeding him Victory cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 05, 2018, 04:15:22 am
I think you need an "if you do" on Dragon.  Otherwise, I can play it, choose to trash a Victory card from my hand, fail to do so because there are none, and still get the effect.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 05, 2018, 04:59:53 am
Terraforming Mars: (https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=New%20Horizons&description=If%20there%20are%20fewer%20than%20ten%20supply%20piles%3A%20gain%20a%20Province%2C%20draw%20four%20randomizer%20cards%2C%20choose%20one%20of%20them%2C%20and%20add%20the%20corresponding%20supply%20pile%20to%20the%20kingdom%2C%20performing%20any%20necessary%20setup.%20Return%20the%20randomizer%20cards%20to%20the%20bottom%20of%20their%20deck.%0A%0A-%0A%0ASetup%3A%20In%20games%20using%20this%2C%20begin%20the%20the%20game%20with%20only%20six%20supply%20piles%20instead%20of%20ten.&type=Event&credit=Illustration%3A%20Pascal%20Lee&price=%247&preview=&type2=&picture=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pascallee.net%2Fs%2Fcc_images%2Fteaserbox_888703263.jpg%3Ft%3D1420332367&color0=0&color1=0&size=1)
(https://i.imgur.com/SHkDvob.png)
A few different Terraforming Mars mechanics found their way into this... cards that can't be played until the planet has gotten warm/wet/airy enough, special cheaper ways of acquiring basic resources, and drawing four cards for your research phase. If Young Witch turns up then I guess this only can be used three times instead of four. Not sure how "performing any necessary setup" would interact with cards with heirlooms, though.
I don't think this works. First, it is unclear how it would even work with kingdom randomizing. I draw 7 kingdom card randomizers, then I draw New Horizons, now what? Also minor complaint, but the theme is completely out of place.

Then it just does its thing way too late into the game. Apart from major "perform any necessary setup" confusion, it just won't do anything. If you're adding new piles only as you are greening, they will have minimal effect. So overall, this event just leads to more boring games with less variety - which does not sound like a good representation for Terraforming Mars.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 05, 2018, 08:18:30 am
The problem is that this card is a very unsteady Pawn variant, but usually better than Pawn.
Usually is not strictly
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 05, 2018, 08:42:55 am
Here's one I've had for a while based on Agricola:
Agriculture
$5 Action - Duration
You may set aside a non-Victory card from your hand.  If you do, gain a copy of that card, setting it aside with that card.
At the start of each of your turns, put one of those cards into your hand.
Thematically it is a great match but I think that the card is too weak. You have to play a terminal, not play the strong card that you want to copy, have that strong card out of your deck during the next turn and you only gain the second copy two turns later.
Compared to others $5 gainers this looks incredibly weak. It becomes better with expensive cards that have Potion or Debt in their cost (especially stuff that becomes strong later in the game like City Quarter) but even then the tempo disadvantage might be too significant.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 05, 2018, 11:24:28 am
Compared to Harem and Mercenary, Dragon sounds rather strong. Phoenix is a nice Feast variant, but alas a little broken when there are other cursors in the game. What about just giving you a Copper instead of the Curse?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 05, 2018, 11:35:41 am
I think you need an "if you do" on Dragon.  Otherwise, I can play it, choose to trash a Victory card from my hand, fail to do so because there are none, and still get the effect.
Yes, just copy the Death Cart wording:
You may trash an Victory card from your hand. If you don't, trash this.

Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=D%26D&description=%2B1%20Action%0ARoll%202d4.%20For%20each%20die%2C%20if%20it%20was%20a%3A%0A1%2C%20%2B1%20Card%0A2%2C%20%2B1%20Action%0A3%2C%20%2B1%20Buy%0A4%2C%20%2B%20%241&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%242&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
Action, cost $2
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)
College Education (Pays homage to Life)
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=College%20Education&description=%2B1%20Buy%0ATake%20Educated.&type=Event&credit=Google%20Images&price=%405&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=1
Quote
Event (cost $2)
+1 Buy
Take Educated.
Here is educated:
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Educated&description=At%20the%20start%20of%20your%20turn%2C%20%2B1%25&type=State&credit=Google%20Images&price=&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=13&color1=0&size=1

Quote
At the start of your turn, +1 VP
I think it can be relatively cheap because all the players will be constantly fighting over it. Also it costs 5 debt, one for each bank loan you take at the start of the Life game if you choose college.


You're only really supposed to have one entry into the contest. What VioletCLM meant by this:
If your idea is better served as multiple card-shaped objects for whatever reason--heirlooms, split piles, prizes, non-supply piles, whatever--sure, go for it, that's fine.
is that if you need to make more than one card to make your idea work, that's okay, not that you should have multiple entries. Something like your Life College Education/Educated thing works.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 05, 2018, 12:30:46 pm

Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.
D&D (Pays homage to D&D)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=D%26D&description=%2B1%20Action%0ARoll%202d4.%20For%20each%20die%2C%20if%20it%20was%20a%3A%0A1%2C%20%2B1%20Card%0A2%2C%20%2B1%20Action%0A3%2C%20%2B1%20Buy%0A4%2C%20%2B%20%241&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%242&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
Action, cost $2
+1 Action
Roll 2d4. For each die, if it was a:
1, +1 Card
2, +1 Action
3, +1 Buy
4, + $1

(A d4 is a 4-sided die.)
College Education (Pays homage to Life)
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=College%20Education&description=%2B1%20Buy%0ATake%20Educated.&type=Event&credit=Google%20Images&price=%405&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=1
Quote
Event (cost $2)
+1 Buy
Take Educated.
Here is educated:
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Educated&description=At%20the%20start%20of%20your%20turn%2C%20%2B1%25&type=State&credit=Google%20Images&price=&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=13&color1=0&size=1

Quote
At the start of your turn, +1 VP
I think it can be relatively cheap because all the players will be constantly fighting over it. Also it costs 5 debt, one for each bank loan you take at the start of the Life game if you choose college.


You're only really supposed to have one entry into the contest. What VioletCLM meant by this:
If your idea is better served as multiple card-shaped objects for whatever reason--heirlooms, split piles, prizes, non-supply piles, whatever--sure, go for it, that's fine.
is that if you need to make more than one card to make your idea work, that's okay, not that you should have multiple entries. Something like your Life College Education/Educated thing works.

I知 posting these all as separate entries. You池e allowed to do that.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 05, 2018, 12:33:57 pm
This is my actual entry:

Split pile: Chute/Ladder (pays homage to Chutes and Ladders)
Chute:
This is less the mechanics than the message of the game. Chute gives something nice (representing how you feel instant gratification when doing bad), but gives -1 VP (representing that doing bad is bad in the long run).
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Chute&description=%243.%20When%20you%20play%20this%2C%20set%20it%20aside%20and%20return%20it%20to%20your%20deck%20at%20the%20end%20of%20the%20game.%0A-%0A-1%25&type=Treasure-Curse&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=6&color1=2&size=0

(I know the formatting is messed up but if it痴 normal you can稚 read it)

Quote
Chute (Treasure-Curse, cost: $3)
$3. When you play this, set it aside and return it to your deck at the end of the game.

Ladder:
Again, this is the message rather than the mechanics. The less evil there is in the world (set aside), the more ladders are worth.

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Ladder&description=Worth%201%25%20per%20Chute%20in%20the%20supply.&type=Victory&credit=Google%20Images&price=%245&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=2&color1=0&size=0

Quote
Ladder (victory, cost $5)
Worth 1VP per Chute in the supply.

EDIT:
Randomizer card:
https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Chute%2FLadder&description=Setup%3A%20Place%20a%20Ladder%20down%2C%20than%20a%20Chute%20on%20top%2C%20then%20a%20Ladder%20on%20to%20of%20that%2C%20until%20there%20are%206%20(4%20in%20a%202%20player%20game)%20Chutes%2C%20with%20a%20Ladder%20directly%20under%20each.%20This%20is%20a%20supply%20pile.&type=Victory&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=6&color1=2&size=0

Quote
Setup: Place a Chute down, than a Ladder on top, then a Chute on top of that, until there are 6 (4 in a 2 player game) Chutes, with a Ladder directly on top of each.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 05, 2018, 01:16:13 pm
Without wanting to judge the interesting subtleties that this mixed pile creates, Chute is problematic. As it is mainly useful for spiking in the opening this can often be a free gift for the first player.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 05, 2018, 01:34:45 pm
Without wanting to judge the interesting subtleties that this mixed pile creates, Chute is problematic. As it is mainly useful for spiking in the opening this can often be a free gift for the first player.
Good point. Maybe having Ladder on top would work?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 05, 2018, 02:03:10 pm
I知 posting these all as separate entries. You池e allowed to do that.
I'm pretty sure you can only have one entry, even if it's not explicitly stated in the rules.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 05, 2018, 10:43:16 pm
When does this round end again? I feel my submission could be improved by making more of the Powerhouses trash cards (and care about what they trash), but I don't have time/energy to do it today...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on November 05, 2018, 10:53:57 pm
In theory it should end in a few hours, but in practice I'd expect more like forty hours, because the US elections are going to consume all my time tonight and tomorrow.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Violet CLM on November 08, 2018, 01:46:18 am
7 Wonders (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775451#msg775451) - Tarken
The appeal of Native Village is not that it has a lot of words but that they all communicate a simple idea. By contrast, while I think I know what idea this card is trying to communicate, I don't see how its text arrives at that idea or really makes for a playable experience at all. I don't see why anyone would want to buy this... if you add a card to the wonder deck, and you want to GET that card, you're basically counting on shuffling before anyone else does, which is a hard thing to control unless complemented by specific cards (Messenger, Scavenger, etc.). You can't even use this as a very weak Attack by putting a Curse in the wonder deck, because then somebody else could just trash it for $2.

Agricola (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775770#msg775770) - Erick648
This feels more like a Haven variant than an Archive variant, despite the borrowing of some wording, but removing Haven's cantrip nature makes it play very differently. Getting the cards back into your hand on two different turns nicely gets around some of the more powerful possibilities of an into-your-hand duplicator (e.g. Treasure Map, Graverobber), and the fact this can duplicate anything (except for victory cards) is likewise balanced by the fact this is very slow and takes a long time to get back into your deck after you play it. All in all, this is a perfectly functional and plausible Dominion card whose influence from another game is quite subtle.

Agricola (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775611#msg775611) - GreyEK
This is cute, but doing something at the start of each player's turn like this is kind of annoying, especially when the text instructing me to do so is buried in a supply pile instead of on a card in front of me. Landmarks can get away with this because they give me points--Elder I wouldn't have as much incentive to remember.

Agricola (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775246#msg775246) - Holunder9
Making this a landscape card instead of part of the supply makes me a bit likelier to remember to add tokens to this one, but this feels a bit too self-contained, and the decision of whether to buy it or not on any given turn doesn't feel very interesting.

Arkham Horror (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775619#msg775619) - NoMoreFun
Oddly, I don't think this suffers from being as hard to remember as the last two Agricolas, because the fact it's a Landmark (and one that can end the game!) makes it function better as a looming presence over every turn. I think I'd need a lot of playtesting before I could really say how well this works, though... if taking 3VP is good enough to buy a Curse for, then does that mean that players will simply avoid buying cards that give Curses to other players? And how likely is it that this would ever actually end the game? It's hard to predict.

Battleship (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775801#msg775801) - MrHiTech
This appears to be a slower, less-integrated-into-general-Dominion-rules version of Chariot Race.

Betrayal at House on the Hill (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775805#msg775805) - Violet CLM
I can't lie: I think this is elegant. Really I'm surprised more people didn't end up using Heirlooms for things. My main concern is that the result of the high debt cost might be that everyone would wait for one player to buy this, then everyone else would buy it in immediate succession, to ride out the debt at roughly the same speed. I'm also not quite sure what I think about the fact that buying Estates before the Project, to make it cheaper, then gives you fewer chances to score lots of cheap VP afterwards.

Bohnanza (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775277#msg775277) - hypercube
Everything about this is stylish, matching the bean colors to the card colors in particular. Wax Bean is a great $2, usually less useful than Silver but just exciting enough to capture people's attention. My main points of concern are Blue Bean and Cocoa Bean... if you only play Coco Bean once, it's a Prince, and between the first and last times you play it, one or more Action cards you like have been removed from your deck. I'm not sure that's significantly more powerful than Teacher or Champion, but Blue Bean is so hard to exchange that getting Cocoa Bean should probably be slower than either of those canonical Traveller line enders. I guess that's the reason the lower Beans focus more on high numbers than on exchanging? On that note, kudos to Black-Eyed Bean for seamlessly giving you a source of useful action cards to use Cocoa Bean on, even if you'd spent the rest of the game only buying Wax Beans.

Broom Service (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775438#msg775438) - Fragasnap
I haven't played Broom Service, but this card reminds me of Basari, so I guess I can relate to it anyway. My suspicion is that this is so expensive there won't be a lot of copies in circulation at any given time, significantly reducing the chance of the gain failing to happen. Turn order has weird effects on this one too, like if player 3's card is revealed on player 1's turn, then player 2 can put down that same card in order to sabotage player 3's turn.

Carcassonne (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775488#msg775488) - spiralstaircase
A mini-expansion is not quite what I had in mind for allowing multiple card-shaped objects to express a concept, so I'm not sure whether to talk about each card individually or focus on what they have in common. In general I'm worried these are a little too focused on concept and not quite focused enough on execution. Cloister's eight card trigger isn't justified by the card's function itself, for example, only by its Carcassonne equivalent, and I am baffled by the $6 threshold on City Walls, which outside of Bank is basically never going to happen. I like Field as a sort of roll-your-own Landmark, and Road is probably quite strong in the right kingdom, but mostly I think these look very exciting but aren't quite ready.

Castell (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775323#msg775323) - scott_pilgrim
I think I'd rather see this concept as a Landmark, in the classic three-2VP-tokens-per-player vein. Otherwise I don't know... this is the kind of unexciting, sometimes-really-useful card that lots of games need, but is that really the right stuff for a $6? In general I'd rather have two Conspirators.

Chess (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775571#msg775571) - silvern
Should be a traveller.

Chutes and Ladders (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775970#msg775970) - MrHiTech
A collection of pretty ordinary fan card ideas, though structuring a split pile in a way other than AAAAABBBBB is an interesting idea. I suspect it would take some work while playing with these to determine how useful these are and how to optimize them.

Coup (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775805#msg775805) - Violet CLM
This is transparently an idea from another game clumsily transplanted into Dominion. It fails to preserve the reason that idea worked in its original context, and fails to integrate that idea with any other parts of Dominion in its new context.

Dungeons and Dragons (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775336#msg775336) - Doom_Shark
I kind of like the idea of a card that becomes much less useful if you draw it late in your turn, but +2 Actions is pretty weak, and in general I think this compares unfavorably with other VP-gaining actions.

Dungeons and Dragons (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775802#msg775802) - MrHiTech
The effects of playing this have been discussed pretty much exhaustively already, but I'll add that the dice don't feel like a very Dominion game mechanic to me. A small stack of cards with different effects, like Boons, would be more plausible.

Glory to Rome (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775411#msg775411) - Watno
The core idea here is sound, though considering how hard it would be to pull this off more than once (multiple Provinces and a specific other card in your hand), it may not need to be $6. Or maybe it could search your discard pile? This is somewhere between a Project and Royal Carriage, and that's not a bad place to be. The name needs changing now, of course.

Guess Who? (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775747#msg775747) - King Leon
An excellent candidate for silver-bordered Dominion, but possibly too strong and definitely too slow.

Isle of Skye (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775386#msg775386) - 4est
"Anyway, the idea definitely needs tweaking, but here's a stab at it," ends this post, and between that and the ensuing discussion I'm not sure what I can add. I'm also not sure from the wording whether the loop has a break instruction, or whether it's possible for every other player but you to end up gaining a copy of the card. Still, with enough tweaking I bet this could be a very cool Dominion card.

Life (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775817#msg775817) - MrHiTech
Hey, it's the Fairy from everybody's favorite Carcassonne expansion. This feels like kind of the simplest possible form of the Artifact idea--despite apparently being a State--and that helps drive home for me that I'm not especially into Artifacts. Some more variability needs to be injected into this idea somewhere.

Lifeboat (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775484#msg775484) - Aquila
Anything like this occupies an odd in-between realm where it has to have enough effect to be worth including in the game but not so much effect that it ruins all the player's plans. Tentatively I'd say this works, though like Boons, I'm sure it's not something people would want to deal with in super serious matches. Being able to see next turn's weather effect in advance is probably not usually too useful, but it could surely combine with some specific cards in interesting ways.

Monopoly (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775311#msg775311) - Tejayes
I'm assuming "discard this" at the bottom of this card is meant to negate the top part's effect, though in light of e.g. Procession+Duration I don't think that's strictly correct? Overall this is a pretty cool card, although I'd leave out "trash a Silver," because it's needlessly specific and also doesn't really seem to belong with the rest of the text. Also trying to define "end your turn" is probably too complicated an endeavor for a single card. But there's definitely a strong concept in here that could use a bit more fleshing out.

Netrunner (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775460#msg775460) - artless
This post didn't get a lot of response, but I like all these cards, even if to work better as challenge entries they should really interact with each other somehow. Hired Blade doesn't really do enough to distinguish itself from Witch probably? But the other two are good if you like your token-based gameplay.

Orleans (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775450#msg775450) - Nflickner
At max, this is $20 for 15VP... by comparison, buying five duchies would cost $25, and you'd also be saddled with them weighing down your deck. Plus, by itself the VP->$ trade isn't the best deal in history, but I would totally pay 1VP to turn $7 into $8. (Though I don't see any reason to invoke coffers at all, as compared to just +$1.) Unless it's too strong, this looks like a fine addition to a kingdom.

Pandemic (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775239#msg775239) - faust
This card takes some thought, but I think I'm mostly sold on it. Players are well motivated to buy this early to trash their Coppers/Estates, then at some point it starts being useful if they wind up with some Curses from not being able to play the card often enough to clear the way for their purchases. The only part that really bothers me is the "[w]hen any player shuffles their deck" trigger, which feels too variable and too vaguely defined.

Power Grid (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775499#msg775499) - Asper
There sure are a lot of cards caring about Provinces in this challenge. Power Grid is not my favorite game, but I think these card-shaped objects make good use of the concept in question, and tying the auction to an event that happens only rarely makes it less of a slog. It's a pity Dominion has no way of keeping track of people's scores, to give the underdogs a bit of an advantage in these auctions, but clockwise order is random enough I suppose. Really there's nothing to complain about here, a single concept well expressed without hitting any obvious traps.

Settlers of Catan (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775482#msg775482) - terminalCopper
Obviously these are all translations of development cards, but I still can't escape the feeling there are two separate concepts at play here: the Catanians/Handicaps, and everything else. And even the latter category is two concepts, powerful Reserve cards that may only be called once each and cards that are bought (and kept) face-down. As is, this post is trying too hard to incorporate everything about Settlers' development cards, but fleshing out some of the individual ideas might well be a fruitful endeavor.

Sheriff of Nottingham (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775325#msg775325) - Commodore Chuckles
Some of the wording here confuses me... "for each player you chose" suggests you can choose more than one player, but the preceding text does not. Can you choose the same player 46 times in a row to empty the Copper pile as part of ending the game? Even if not, this becomes a little too automatic the moment you hit a situation where gaining Copper is good for whatever reason. I wonder how many situations there are where being able to manually reveal another player's hand is beneficial... Gladiator, of course, maybe something else?  But those are all edge cases, and mostly I think this is a nice card. It's probably okay to have one or two, which you'll want considering how strong the on-play effect is, but if you try to rely on this card then your opponent/s will cut you down.

Star Realms (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775403#msg775403) - Chappy7
I'm not totally sold on Reconstruct, whose range of options (most of them unrelated to the top half) confuses me, but Trebuchet looks like a good, straightforward combination of Militia and Farmers' Market. Maybe a little too slow, though indeed 3+ player games would interact with that.

Stratego (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775243#msg775243) - terminalCopper
Even putting aside the issue that these should really be Action - Attack - Traveller, these cards just don't look very useful to me. You can't really assume the kingdom will have a lot of other traveller chains in it, and if not, these cards just don't strike me as powerful enough for me to want to buy some of my own to (occasionally) manage to make you discard yours.

Takenoko (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775295#msg775295) - Kudasai
I mentioned earlier that I'm learning I'm not too enthused by Artifacts, but the same cannot be said for Empires-style cards, and this is very Empires, even if the tokens in question are coins instead of VPs. Panda might be too expensive at $4, but I could definitely be convinced otherwise... otherwise, everything here looks like it'd be a lot of fun to play with. Extra points for Gardener providing a reason to put tokens on a supply pile that nobody (otherwise) wants to buy cards from.

Temporum (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775343#msg775343) - crlundy
Another from the Empires school of design, this is an easy enough Event to understand, but I'm not immediately convinced it would be the most fun thing to play with. This might be incentivizing specialization a little too much, and the player interaction could get nasty.

Terraforming Mars (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775805#msg775805) - Violet CLM
Issues with this one have been pointed out in another reply. A bonus for early Provinces is not a bad idea--see Tournament--but making the rest of the game less interesting is probably not the way to accomplish that.

Tichu (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775826#msg775826) - singletee
Like the Carcassonne and Netrunner entries, this is a series of separate supply piles, none of which are guaranteed to show up in the same kingdoms as one another. So that's a bit dubious. These are generally fine cards of varying memorability (though Loyal Companion looks weak to me on first blush), but I can't escape the feeling they're a little too narrowly focused on specific cards from within Tichu without much acknowledgment of the role they play in Tichu's broader rules. For sure some of the entries have flown a bit too close to the sun in trying to incorporate into Dominion rules from other games entirely, but these are too close to the ground.

Ticket to Ride (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775300#msg775300) - Fly-Eagles-Fly
First, a suggestion: using letters instead of numbers to specify each supply pile should avoid potential confusion with costs or the implication that the piles are being ordered. I don't see where the 19 number comes from... normally there should be 15 (ten + silver + gold + estate + duchy + province), and the odd cases with more piles (bane, colony/platinum) are probably not worth making a fuss over. Better to have no tickets reward you for buying Platinums than to have to begin each game by sorting out all the tickets that include numbers >= 16. Hopefully even after that there wouldn't be the full 15 choose 2 (=105) tickets, randomizing the number to supply pile assignment should mean having some gaps is harmless. Anyway, putting aside the issue you bring up of how to ensure players are able to gain two cards in a turn, I worry this might give people too many points without much to limit them besides running out of three piles. Why should I buy a Province when I could get 6VP buying a Village and a Woodcutter instead?

Tzolk'in (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775805#msg775805) - Violet CLM
Probably functional, but it manages to lose a lot of the point of Tzolk'in in the implementation. Tzolk'in is all about looking several turns into the future to set up effects; here you can try to do that, but you're still at the mercy of Dominion's deck shuffling and random card drawing. You can't even adjust the cost of the card you get from this the same turn you gain that card, so if you've spent the last many turns aiming for a Prince, and suddenly you draw a hand of all green and yellow, well, too bad.



Judging Dominion cards is an inherently subjective endeavor, all the more so when the standards for judgment were not well established. Some entries were too close to ordinary cards with no influence from other games--other entries were too close to their original games with only a token attempt to be Dominion cards. But I couldn't give you an objective way of measuring that, nor a promise that I was entirely consistent in my reactions to any given point on that scale. Some other entries were also unfairly negatively affected by relying on very precise numbers for their prices or effects, which playtesting could reveal to be exactly right or too high or too low, but which my intuitions were insufficient to fully gauge. Obviously, despite my concerns about this or that point on this or that card, I was really excited to read all these entries and I would enjoy trying out many of them. Still, I have to pick out two that best captured that delicate, poorly-defined balance between being good Dominion objects but also good references...

Runner up: Takenoko (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775295#msg775295) - Kudasai
Winner: Power Grid (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg775499#msg775499) - Asper
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 08, 2018, 02:26:17 am
Old:
Quote
Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.

Why would the player to your left even write another number than 1?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 08, 2018, 07:44:00 am
Oh wow! Thank you :)
I certainly didn't expect to win this one, given how many cool ideas there were this time. I guess with a bidding mechanic, I kind of cheated on the balance front  ;D

I am going to post my challenge later today, when I thought of something worthy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 08, 2018, 08:08:41 am
Old:
Quote
Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.

Why would the player to your left even write another number than 1?
It is not that simple. I know too little about game theory to give a good answer but I guess that the best strategy is to randomize your number with higher probabilities for lower numbers and lower probabilities for higher numbers. Always choosing 1 is definitely not best as this is then a save $1 for the opponent.

That said, the card is obviously far too weak.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 08, 2018, 08:15:02 am
Old:
Quote
Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.

Why would the player to your left even write another number than 1?
Because you know that they would write 1, and you write 1, then you get + $1, so the player to your left writes a different number so you get $0.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 08, 2018, 11:15:30 am
Old:
Quote
Missile (Pays homage to Battleship)

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Missile&description=%2B1%20Action%0AYou%20and%20the%20player%20to%20your%20left%20each%20write%20down%20a%20whole%20number%20between%201%20and%204%20on%20a%20piece%20of%20paper.%20Unfold%20the%20pieces%20of%20paper.%20If%20the%20numbers%20were%20the%20same%2C%20%2B%20%24%20equal%20to%20the%20number.&type=Action&credit=Google%20Images&price=%243&preview=&type2=&picture=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0

Quote
+1 Action
You and the player to your left each write down a whole number between 1 and 4 on a piece of paper. Unfold the pieces of paper. If the numbers were the same, + $ equal to the number.

Why would the player to your left even write another number than 1?
It is not that simple. I know too little about game theory to give a good answer but I guess that the best strategy is to randomize your number with higher probabilities for lower numbers and lower probabilities for higher numbers. Always choosing 1 is definitely not best as this is then a save $1 for the opponent.

That said, the card is obviously far too weak.

That壮 true. The best strategy is to write down

1$ in 12/25 cases,
2$ in 6/25 cases,
3$ in 4/25 cases,
4$ in 3/25 cases.

Even with full information about this strategy, your opponent will have an expected outcome of exactly 12/25, no matter what he does.

Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 08, 2018, 12:33:01 pm
I am a minimaxer. When I always say $1, Missile is at most a Copper. The worst case ist always $1. For every other number the worst case would be higher. Letting my opponent with an overpriced Copper is much better, even in long terms than giving him a potential +$4. Even with 5 Missiles in his hand, he can never buy a Province or a Gold, if I limit his maximum gain to $1 per Missile. If I would randomly pick numbers from 1 to 4, there is the propability to even let him gain a Colony. In Dominion, the average money is not as important as the maximum money. A $6 and a $2 hand are much better than two $4 hands, for example. A deck with only 2 Golds and 1 trillion Coppers (average hand: $5) can buy a Provice, while a deck with two Silvers and 3 Coppers (average hand: $7) cannot.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 08, 2018, 01:51:03 pm
So, new challenge:

Make an Action-Attack card.
Tertiary types are allowed.
Reusing official components like tokens is allowed.
Strictly one card, so no split piles or Traveller lines.
Please make a new card, don't reuse your older ideas (as good as they may be).
A fitting name would be great.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 08, 2018, 02:29:03 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/JBndjvg.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on November 08, 2018, 02:36:12 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/OC4tPOL.png)

It's like a Library because it's a book and it's an evil cursed book so it curses people and you need to read 4 pages to learn how to curse people. Because it's an attack that makes 5 types always available (action, treasure, victory, curse and attack).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 08, 2018, 04:18:32 pm
I am a minimaxer. When I always say $1, Missile is at most a Copper. The worst case ist always $1. For every other number the worst case would be higher. Letting my opponent with an overpriced Copper is much better, even in long terms than giving him a potential +$4. Even with 5 Missiles in his hand, he can never buy a Province or a Gold, if I limit his maximum gain to $1 per Missile. If I would randomly pick numbers from 1 to 4, there is the propability to even let him gain a Colony. In Dominion, the average money is not as important as the maximum money. A $6 and a $2 hand are much better than two $4 hands, for example. A deck with only 2 Golds and 1 trillion Coppers (average hand: $5) can buy a Provice, while a deck with two Silvers and 3 Coppers (average hand: $7) cannot.
TerminalCopper pointed out that the dominant strategy leads to less than +0.5$.
Your considerations about a more uneven Coin production being superior than a constant Coin production are dubious. But even if they were right, not wanting to help your opponent to spike can hardly be as important as reducing his average Coin production to less than the half of what your strategy would lead to.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on November 08, 2018, 04:23:25 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/EbJcK2g.png)

Here's my revised entry, an Action-Attack-Duration!  Stowaway is sort of a mashup of Gear and Ambassador: you save cards from this hand for next hand, and give a copy of one of them to your opponents.  Early game, this will neatly keep Estates and extra Coppers out of your shuffles while junking the other players, though being a duration means it only works every other turn.  In the mid and late game, a pair of these can function as handy utility cards to keep your shuffles clean, as well as set up big turns, just be sure to keep some junk around to hand out copies of (or perhaps a Province when you're ready to end the game).

*Revised to change to an Action type instead of Night, so to fit within the parameters of this week's contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 08, 2018, 04:28:20 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/CR5T0fQ.png)

Here's my entry, a Night-Attack-Duration!  Stowaway is sort of a mashup of Gear and Ambassador: you save your leftover cards from this hand for next hand, and give a copy of one of them to your opponents.  Early game, this will neatly keep Estates and extra Coppers out of your shuffles while junking the other players, though being a duration means it only works every other turn, and the junking is also delayed.  As a Night card, you can also use this to save actions that you drew dead.  In the mid and late game, a pair of these can function as handy utility cards to keep your shuffles clean, as well as set up big turns, just be sure to keep some junk around to hand out copies of (or perhaps a Province when you're ready to end the game).
Cool card, but the contest is for an Action-Attack card. Or maybe he just meant any attack card. I really like the card idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on November 08, 2018, 04:36:45 pm
Cool card, but the contest is for an Action-Attack card. Or maybe he just meant any attack card. I really like the card idea.
Oh whoops, I missed that--this actually started as an Action, but then I thought it would work well as a Night card and forgot that the parameters specified Action-Attack.  I may revise it back to being an Action later. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 08, 2018, 06:06:08 pm
Yes, I meant to make it Action-Attack. Mostly because I wanted the attack effect itself to be new/exiting and feared that Treasures or Night cards would shift the focus to the pecularities of these types. Similar reason for disallowing Travellers and such.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 08, 2018, 06:24:54 pm
(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/0rwmntlXjNSv.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 08, 2018, 06:35:18 pm
(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/0rwmntlXjNSv.png)
Neat, nice and thematic. Anyway, here's my submission:
(https://i.imgur.com/N3XImS7.jpg?1)
Alright, I changed my entry now. It's a reverse Druid, each other player has the choice between three hexes. I hope it's not too weak. I played around with different vanilla bonuses and this one seemed the best.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 08, 2018, 06:50:13 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/vbuAQjI.jpg)

Edit: New wording based on Faust's Suggestion. It no longer has the "while this is in play" thing which apparently is a guaranteed loss in this contest. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 08, 2018, 06:52:28 pm
(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/0rwmntlXjNSv.png)

Just comparing this to Ghost Ship, the drawing is better, and the attack honestly seems better too.  Junking plus topdecking, even if it's weak topdecking, is brutal.  And it stacks. So if this is going to be a card I think it has to cost at least $5.  Maybe $6.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on November 08, 2018, 07:40:24 pm
(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/0rwmntlXjNSv.png)

Just comparing this to Ghost Ship, the drawing is better, and the attack honestly seems better too.  Junking plus topdecking, even if it's weak topdecking, is brutal.  And it stacks. So if this is going to be a card I think it has to cost at least $5.  Maybe $6.

Agreed, it also seems like an absolute nightmare if you chain them too since it doesn't have a Sea Hag type discard thing. With it being a decent draw card it doesn't seem hard to chain either...

(https://i.imgur.com/qTHSK1v.jpg?1)
It's a Miscreant knight, the attack is similar to Knights but different, can't tell if it's stronger or weaker. Then if no one trashed an expensive card, you get an extra card.
I'm not sure having a trashing attack that's also draw is great for similar reasons, it seems really easy to set a deck that can play 3-4 of these per turn and decimate the other players decks. It doesn't even have any safety valve like all the other trashing attacks (Knights dying, Giant being slow and such). And it also attacks peoples hands too!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 08, 2018, 07:47:15 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/yrK9nSS.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.

Oh man, this was the very first submission, and I'm not sure I can beat it. This card is so cool...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 08, 2018, 10:27:29 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/yrK9nSS.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.

Oh man, this was the very first submission, and I'm not sure I can beat it. This card is so cool...
True. I saw it and was like, Man can I just have a chance one week?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 08, 2018, 10:29:31 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/qTHSK1v.jpg?1)
It's a Miscreant knight, the attack is similar to Knights but different, can't tell if it's stronger or weaker. Then if no one trashed an expensive card, you get an extra card.
I'm not sure having a trashing attack that's also draw is great for similar reasons, it seems really easy to set a deck that can play 3-4 of these per turn and decimate the other players decks. It doesn't even have any safety valve like all the other trashing attacks (Knights dying, Giant being slow and such). And it also attacks peoples hands too!
Yeah, I'll change it a bit before the end of the contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 09, 2018, 01:54:19 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 02:04:13 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 09, 2018, 02:38:27 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 09, 2018, 03:01:54 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
The new wording leads to stacking so I'd stick with the "while this is in play" wording which is the classical anti-Throne wording from cards like Highway and thus totally fine.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 09, 2018, 03:11:30 am
The new wording leads to stacking so I'd stick with the "while this is in play" wording which is the classical anti-Throne wording from cards like Highway and thus totally fine.
It's not though. There is a reason that Swamp Hag etc. don't say "while this is in play", because it is unclear whether such effects would be blockable with Moat etc.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 09, 2018, 03:16:43 am
That's wrong. Moat and Lighthouse say "when another player plays an Attack card", i.e. they care only about the moment the Attack is played and not about what the card actually says.
You could e.g. have a Duration Attack that says "in 5 turns, all players get 5 Curses" and while it would be a mess to track Moat would only be able to defend against it if it were revealed at the very moment the Attack card is played.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 09, 2018, 04:06:32 am
Asper, would you except a faux-Attack card like this?

(https://i.imgur.com/Mr3MOLd.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 09, 2018, 05:49:23 am
Asper, would you except a faux-Attack card like this?

No. I love the little detail of the skulls at the top, though.

I also won't accept cards that harm other players without having the attack type (no IGG, Noble Brigand is fine) nor cards that have the Attack type without needing it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on November 09, 2018, 07:28:11 am
(https://i.imgur.com/aUHBlnZ.jpg)
Quote
Curfew
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $3
+$2. Move your +1 Action token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +1 Action.) Each other player removes their +1 Action token from the Supply.
Institute a Curfew to get the efficiency you want out of the right people, while everyone else grumbles about it.

I was always disappointed that there aren't any cards that make the Adventures tokens move about.  Early plays of Curfew as you try to build your engine can act as a major thorn in other players' attempts to use that token as you keep pushing it away.  Later, multiple Curfews could be used to pass the +Action token around and keep yourself flowing through multiple types of otherwise terminal actions.

EDIT: Correction to match reminder text in quote. Additional theme\history\strategy discussion added.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: scott_pilgrim on November 09, 2018, 08:56:29 am
That's wrong. Moat and Lighthouse say "when another player plays an Attack card", i.e. they care only about the moment the Attack is played and not about what the card actually says.
You could e.g. have a Duration Attack that says "in 5 turns, all players get 5 Curses" and while it would be a mess to track Moat would only be able to defend against it if it were revealed at the very moment the Attack card is played.

But when something appears below a line on a Dominion card, it doesn't happen when the card is played. It's just saying that e.g. a general rule of Dominion is that while a Highway is in play, cards cost $1 less. My gut says if you revealed a Moat when a "while in play" attack is played (assuming the "while in play" is below a line), the "attack" would not be blocked, because you're blocking the effects of the card itself, not the rules of Dominion.

Regardless of whether that interpretation is correct, the more important point is that it's very unclear what would happen in that case, so probably best to avoid that situation altogether.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 09, 2018, 08:59:08 am
It was bothering me a little bit that Julius Caesar wasn't a king so I changed the art on Regicide to depict the death of Henri IV instead.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 09, 2018, 09:38:38 am
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.

Challenge accepted.

(https://i.imgur.com/MOvNIiq.jpg)

Quote
Drunkard
Types: Action - Attack - Duration
Cost: $4
+2 Coffers
The player to your left takes this into their play area.
-
During clean-up, you may pay $3 to discard this. If you do not, it stays in play.
If you have any Drunkards in play at the end of cleanup, you draw one less card.

Clarification: Taking the card does not count as gaining it.

The thing I like best about this is that if your opponent plays a moat, your Drunkard stays in play in front of you :-)

Reworded from "Put this in front of the player to your left" at Asper's suggestion
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 09, 2018, 09:56:19 am
I'm with scott_pilgrim here. Effects under a line are not triggered on play (they don't even count as "instructions", see Enchantress), and therefore it's highly dubitable they warrent the Attack type.

A card without an actual "on play" attack portion has a 0% chance of winning this round.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on November 09, 2018, 10:30:14 am
(https://i.imgur.com/EbJcK2g.png)

Here is a revised version of Stowaway (also updated in my original post (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg776583#msg776583)).

My initial submission of Stowaway was a Night-Attack-Duration card which was outside Asper's parameters for this week's contest as Fly-Eagles-Fly helpfully pointed out.  The Action version is a bit weaker since it doesn't play as nicely with terminal draw as the Night version, so to make up for this, I've made the junking on-play instead of delayed to the duration turn.  This is also better for tracking purposes, reaction timing, etc.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 09, 2018, 10:39:56 am
It was bothering me a little bit that Julius Caesar wasn't a king so I changed the art on Regicide to depict the death of Henri IV instead.

Now it's Caligula (can you tell I've been reading the Wikipedia article on regicides?).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread #7: Action Attack
Post by: Aquila on November 09, 2018, 10:50:32 am
Quote
Enforcer - Action Attack, $5 cost.
+2 Cards
Each other player discards down to 2 cards in hand, then chooses either +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
A person enforcing and rewarding a small hand law.

An edit from this:
(https://i.imgur.com/0xjNiIb.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 09, 2018, 11:28:44 am
A card without an actual "on play" attack portion has a 0% chance of winning this round.

For the avoidance of doubt, do you count "Put this in front of the player to your left" as such an attack?  If not I'll remove Drunkard and reconsider.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 11:38:04 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".

This is great, but the attack is significantly different than what I hoped when worded like this.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 09, 2018, 11:46:07 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".

This is great, but the attack is significantly different than what I hoped when worded like this.
I don't really see how it would play differently from your original suggestion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 11:48:14 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".

This is great, but the attack is significantly different than what I hoped when worded like this.
I don't really see how it would play differently from your original suggestion.

Actually I was thinking about it wrong.  This would be the same.  I was thinking that the -1 token would be once per turn, but now I see that if you played 5 peddlers in a row you'd just be getting it and returning it over and over.  Thanks for the suggestion.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on November 09, 2018, 11:49:30 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".

This is great, but the attack is significantly different than what I hoped when worded like this.

If you say "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they first take their -(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png)1$ token", then it would act exactly like your original card intended; except if combined with other attacks that give the -(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) token.

However, it really seems like you can get the same basic thing with a lot less complexity with simply:

Action-Attack
+2 Coffers
Each other player takes their -(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) token.

If you want non-stackable coin penalty, the -(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) token is the way to do it. And if this was only a duration so that it hurts your opponents while it is in play, as opposed to because it helps you next turn, then there's no reason for it to be a Duration if you are using the -(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) token.

*Edit* Oh dang, missed that you want it to be stackable in terms of each time your opponent plays a card... so my idea is quite different and weaker.

But I think making it hit all cards could be way too strong. Even just playing one per turn completely destroys a lot of decks.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 11:50:51 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yJDQYeh.jpg)
I don't think a "while in play" effect works with attack typing and reactions like Moat. Also it would need a dividing line like this.
I was going for a Swamp Hag kind of thing.  I guess I should have taken some wording from there.

How is, "Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, it produces 1 fewer $."
How would I word this to make it not stackable?
"Until your next turn, when an opponent plays an action card that produces $, they take their -1$ token".

This is great, but the attack is significantly different than what I hoped when worded like this.
I don't really see how it would play differently from your original suggestion.

Actually I was thinking about it wrong.  This would be the same.  I was thinking that the -1 token would be once per turn, but now I see that if you played 5 peddlers in a row you'd just be getting it and returning it over and over.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Although it still technically could be different with a few things.  Capitalism being the first that comes to mind.  With the original, something like peddler or market wouldn't count as a treasure when Tax Collector is in play with the original wording.  But the cases where there are differences should be pretty few.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on November 09, 2018, 11:53:48 am
Although it still technically could be different with a few things.  Capitalism being the first that comes to mind.  With the original, something like peddler or market wouldn't count as a treasure when Tax Collector is in play with the original wording.  But the cases where there are differences should be pretty few.

This is wrong. Capitalism doesn't care if a card actually produces any money. It cares if it has +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in the text. Peddler would still be a Treasure because it still has that in the text. Doesn't matter that it produces +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 11:54:34 am
Although it still technically could be different with a few things.  Capitalism being the first that comes to mind.  With the original, something like peddler or market wouldn't count as a treasure when Tax Collector is in play with the original wording.  But the cases where there are differences should be pretty few.

This is wrong. Capitalism doesn't care if a card actually produces any money. It cares if it has +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in the text. Peddler would still be a Treasure because it still has that in the text. Doesn't matter that it produces +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).

Lol I can't figure out Capitalism
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on November 09, 2018, 11:56:28 am
Although it still technically could be different with a few things.  Capitalism being the first that comes to mind.  With the original, something like peddler or market wouldn't count as a treasure when Tax Collector is in play with the original wording.  But the cases where there are differences should be pretty few.

This is wrong. Capitalism doesn't care if a card actually produces any money. It cares if it has +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in the text. Peddler would still be a Treasure because it still has that in the text. Doesn't matter that it produces +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).

Lol I can't figure out Capitalism

Simply put, Capitalism affects any card whose text has a "+" immediately followed by a "(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png)" whether that (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) has a number inside of it or not.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 11:59:42 am
Although it still technically could be different with a few things.  Capitalism being the first that comes to mind.  With the original, something like peddler or market wouldn't count as a treasure when Tax Collector is in play with the original wording.  But the cases where there are differences should be pretty few.

This is wrong. Capitalism doesn't care if a card actually produces any money. It cares if it has +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) in the text. Peddler would still be a Treasure because it still has that in the text. Doesn't matter that it produces +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/5/5d/Coin0.png/16px-Coin0.png).

Lol I can't figure out Capitalism

Simply put, Capitalism affects any card whose text has a "+" immediately followed by a "(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png)" whether that (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) has a number inside of it or not.
I gotta get some more Capitalism games under my belt for sure. 
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 09, 2018, 12:04:33 pm
My post is now edited with the new - $1 token wording
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 09, 2018, 12:04:50 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/YeEydsL.jpg)

EDIT: Some changes to reduce craziness and tracking issues.

EDIT 2: Restricted to players with 5-card hands.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: silvern on November 09, 2018, 12:15:29 pm
Thought of this one a few weeks ago, finally made it into card form today...hopefully, it still counts!
(....even if it doesn't count for the contest, per se, I'd still like feedback!)
(https://i.imgur.com/SVZIUaom.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GendoIkari on November 09, 2018, 12:30:42 pm
My post is now edited with the new - $1 token wording

I don't think it's clear if they take the token before or after resolving the card. Under the normal rules of "when", it would be after, but people won't know that necessarily. If you want it to be before (which would match your original wording), then you can put "first" to make it work similar to things like Moat.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on November 09, 2018, 12:32:36 pm
Two card ideas:

Heretic
$4
+1 Card
+1 Villager
If you have 4 or more villagers, each opponent gains a curse.

Road Block
$3
+1 Action
+1 Card
Set aside a card from your hand face up.
At the start of your next turn, put it into your hand.
When another player gains a copy of the set-aside card, that player takes 2 debts.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 09, 2018, 12:38:32 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/rGBNJPY.jpg)

EDIT: Some changes to reduce craziness and tracking issues.

I don't understand why this should be an Attack card. Sure, some cards like Harvest or Abandoned Mine are gone, but other cards like Smithy or Jack of All Trades even like this card
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 09, 2018, 04:02:58 pm
Asper, would you except a faux-Attack card like this?

(https://i.imgur.com/Mr3MOLd.jpg)
DXV had something similar during Adventure playtesting, an Event that attacks you if you did not buy it (here the trigger is different).
I think that's a cool idea to explore but the concrete card is dubious as gaining it makes it more likely that you are hit. Sure, any engine play does but you can easily imagine player just resorting to money to evade getting cursed in Kingdoms without trashers (and in Kingdoms in which engine play is nonetheless good this is just a Peddler).
So perhaps buying the card should make it easier to defend yourself against the auto-Attack such that the pile will actually empty?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on November 09, 2018, 04:05:16 pm
Quote
Extortionist
Action - Attack $5
+$3
Each other player may discard a treasure card. If they don't, they gain a curse
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 09, 2018, 04:46:18 pm
CHALLENGE #7 - ACTION-ATTACK CARD

(https://i.imgur.com/wpF0OK1.jpg)

The wording for how to interact with the Coffers/Villagers mat is likely incorrect, but as I do not yet have a physical copy of the game and the online manual does not cover this very well, it will have to be as is for now.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 09, 2018, 04:49:55 pm
Quote
Extortionist
Action - Attack $5
+$3
Each other player may discard a treasure card. If they don't, they gain a curse
I like this. Cutpurse that can target other Treasures is neato!


CHALLENGE #7 - ACTION - ATTACK CARD

Attack cards are not my strong suite, but perhaps there's room for a Coffers Attack card.

(https://i.imgur.com/91tZOQS.jpg)
I think this would be more interesting if it yielded Coffers such that the card becomes an Attack that potentially defends against itself. I think 4est had an idea along these lines some time ago.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 10, 2018, 02:34:02 am
(https://i.imgur.com/rGBNJPY.jpg)

EDIT: Some changes to reduce craziness and tracking issues.

I don't understand why this should be an Attack card. Sure, some cards like Harvest or Abandoned Mine are gone, but other cards like Smithy or Jack of All Trades even like this card
Well, Fortress likes Knights and they are still an attack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 10, 2018, 02:41:09 am
Thought of this one a few weeks ago, finally made it into card form today...hopefully, it still counts!
(....even if it doesn't count for the contest, per se, I'd still like feedback!)
(https://i.imgur.com/SVZIUaom.png)

This is somewhat iffy with Duration rules. By the rules, you should discard this on the last turn it does something. But with the current wording, the last turn it does something is actually the turn of your last opponent, so by the rules, you would have to dscard it during your opponent's turn, which is just weird. I believe this is this reason why other Duration-Attacks always still do something at the start of your next turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 10, 2018, 03:39:15 am
I think this would be more interesting if it yielded Coffers such that the card becomes an Attack that potentially defends against itself. I think 4est had an idea along these lines some time ago.

Just a quick remark, I've changed the Attack to care about Coffers or Villagers and now the setup gives +3 Villagers instead of +3 Coffers.

As for you comment, that'd be a fun concept to tinker with. I tend to shy away from Attacks that counter themselves. I guess I've had it ingrained in my head that this type of scenario just leads to a card that doesn't get purchased. But maybe it can work if that blocking mechanism also gives benefits (i.e. Coffers or Villagers tokens). For this though competition I'm going to keep it the way it is. I like the idea of players anguishing over whether to use their small pile of 3 Villagers to keep their turn going or use them to block Curses.


DXV had something similar during Adventure playtesting, an Event that attacks you if you did not buy it (here the trigger is different).
I think that's a cool idea to explore but the concrete card is dubious as gaining it makes it more likely that you are hit. Sure, any engine play does but you can easily imagine player just resorting to money to evade getting cursed in Kingdoms without trashers (and in Kingdoms in which engine play is nonetheless good this is just a Peddler).
So perhaps buying the card should make it easier to defend yourself against the auto-Attack such that the pile will actually empty?

Yeah, this was all thrown together very hastily. I was really just posting to see if it was worth pursuing further for this competition. The card most definitely will need some attention. The premise for Centaur is that you're getting a Peddler for a good deal at cost $4.0 given it's about a cost $4.5, but that comes at the cost of increasing your chances of triggering the Attack. But the difference between $4.0 and $4.5 probably isn't worth any amount of Curses. Maybe Ruins would be a better fit? Also, I'd probably change it to 5 cards in play to hit Big Money strategies harder.

I hope to make other Monster cards with various Attacks. Stronger Attacks seem like a natural fit for Split Piles, having a non-Monster on top so the Attack is delayed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 10, 2018, 09:25:41 am
(https://i.imgur.com/6uvly2t.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 10, 2018, 10:11:29 am
About Drunkard, it generally counts as an Attack to make opponents take something bad (e.g. "Miserable" or their "-1 Card" Token). Taking that bad thing is what Moat keeps from happening.

Drunkard however is not taken, it is given. I find it unclear how Moat should interact with this, as the hit player technically isn't told to do anything.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 10, 2018, 11:52:12 am
About Drunkard, it generally counts as an Attack to make opponents take something bad (e.g. "Miserable" or their "-1 Card" Token). Taking that bad thing is what Moat keeps from happening.

Drunkard however is not taken, it is given. I find it unclear how Moat should interact with this, as the hit player technically isn't told to do anything.

OK - kind of like how Masquerade isn't an Attack, then?

I've reworded Drunkard to be "The player to your left takes this card into their play area", does that work for you?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on November 10, 2018, 04:55:07 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/rGBNJPY.jpg)

EDIT: Some changes to reduce craziness and tracking issues.

I don't understand why this should be an Attack card. Sure, some cards like Harvest or Abandoned Mine are gone, but other cards like Smithy or Jack of All Trades even like this card
Well, Fortress likes Knights and they are still an attack.

I really don't see how Pretender is an attack. Each other player playing an Action card for free seems like a benefit for them, the opposite of an attack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 10, 2018, 05:21:40 pm
The key thing to realize is that they get to play a card non-terminally whereas you don't. So in this respect Pretender is a gift.

But if the card they play is a village it sucks (you get a village, they get a cantrip) for them. Or more generally, all the vanilla stuff except for card draw is wasted. So being forced to play a Smithy seems like a gift.
Here we come to the last issue, handsize attacks. Suppose Alice has Village and Smithy in hand and Bob players Pretender. Alice doesn't want to play the Village as mere cantrip and she doesn't want to play the Smithy lest the Militia hits her afterwards. She wants to keep both Actions in hand but cannot due to Pretender's "Attack".

This is hard to judge but my hunch is that more often that not this is rather a gift than an Attack. The card, or more generally the copy-stuff-from-other-players idea behind it, is very interesting. But I wouldn't categorize it as Attack. Attacks nearly unambiguously always hurt. Sure, you might love Treasure Hunter being hit by Enchantress or love those incoming Curses to feed your Foragers but these are, just like the Knight-Fortess example that faust mentioned, exceptions.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on November 10, 2018, 05:49:10 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/Wxf0s0N.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on November 10, 2018, 06:28:33 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/JBndjvg.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.

This is one of the best cards I've seen - it really encourages players to use different strategies from each other.

It would probably be fine at $5 as It's easy enough to make the attack whiff
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on November 10, 2018, 07:08:22 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/Wxf0s0N.jpg)
I like this one, but I think it'd be fine at $5. The attack is weaker than knights' because the attacked player can choose from any card they have in play for the attack to hit, rather than the top two cards of their deck. Or if it's near the beginning of the game and they only have a couple cards costing more than $2, they can always choose not to play them that turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on November 10, 2018, 07:57:01 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/Wxf0s0N.jpg)
I like this one, but I think it'd be fine at $5. The attack is weaker than knights' because the attacked player can choose from any card they have in play for the attack to hit, rather than the top two cards of their deck. Or if it's near the beginning of the game and they only have a couple cards costing more than $2, they can always choose not to play them that turn.

I've been weighing it up, but the main reason I opted for $6 is to give players a chance to get a few cards costing $3 to $6 in their deck before they start losing them to Demagogues. It's less likely to whiff than Knights, and the on play effect is a little better than Knights.

Another thing I could do is a non optional chancellor effect on play to limit the number of times it pops up in a shuffle.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on November 10, 2018, 08:23:20 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/Wxf0s0N.jpg)
I like this one, but I think it'd be fine at $5. The attack is weaker than knights' because the attacked player can choose from any card they have in play for the attack to hit, rather than the top two cards of their deck. Or if it's near the beginning of the game and they only have a couple cards costing more than $2, they can always choose not to play them that turn.

I've been weighing it up, but the main reason I opted for $6 is to give players a chance to get a few cards costing $3 to $6 in their deck before they start losing them to Demagogues. It's less likely to whiff than Knights, and the on play effect is a little better than Knights.

Another thing I could do is a non optional chancellor effect on play to limit the number of times it pops up in a shuffle.

I, for one, agree with it costing $6, particularly for the first reason you stated.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 11, 2018, 02:30:12 am
(https://i.imgur.com/JBndjvg.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.

I really like the concept of players having to weigh what card is best to throne versus what card to get rid of from your opponents hand. It's a relatively simple concept that offers immense strategy.

Unfortunately I do not think such a focused discard attack can be balanced in it's current state. Cards that favor diverse decks are great, but with only 10 Kingdom cards there will always be overlap and you can probably always find 2-3 common cards that when lost would cripple a players hand. I'm thinking mainly about Village cards, +Buy cards, and such. There is just too much chance of a player locking their opponents out of the game with something like this.

I think this is why there are no official cards like this. The closest card would be Raiders and a player has to put a lot of thought and work into their deck before it can function like Regicide.

I'm sure there's a way to salvage this great concept. Making it so only the first Regicide played attacks would go along way towards reigning this in. This would really make players think hard about which card is best to attack and which card is best to throne.

Anyways, thanks for sharing this and good luck!

[EDIT] I also noticed you've changed your image a few times for this. If you're still undecided on it, have a look at this one. I've had it for awhile, but haven't had a card that fits the theme. It's kind of like an undead Procession. Regicide and how your card plays seems like a great fit!

(https://i.imgur.com/GWCOGDo.png)
Artist Credit: Nick Gindraux
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread #7: Action Attack
Post by: Kudasai on November 11, 2018, 04:38:16 am
(https://i.imgur.com/0xjNiIb.jpg)

These purists are against technological progress, believing that only pure manpower should accomplish work.

Great looking card. Hard to tell how much the +1 Villagers eases such a nasty attack, but I think that paired with the +2 Cards on Purist itself provides a nice, soft defense. Draw cards that net +3 Cards or more will certainly be a better defense, but it's nice that Purist provides some draw for this purpose if no other draw is in the Kingdom.

Looks like a good contender!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 11, 2018, 05:05:55 am
(https://i.imgur.com/rGBNJPY.jpg)

EDIT: Some changes to reduce craziness and tracking issues.

I don't understand why this should be an Attack card. Sure, some cards like Harvest or Abandoned Mine are gone, but other cards like Smithy or Jack of All Trades even like this card
Well, Fortress likes Knights and they are still an attack.

I really don't see how Pretender is an attack. Each other player playing an Action card for free seems like a benefit for them, the opposite of an attack.

Buried in the expanded text of Caravan Guard it states that when you play a card during another persons turn, you get all of that cards benefits, but the only thing that generally carries over are the cards you drew. Specifically, Coin, Buys, and Actions do not carry over.

So this seems to be an Attack in that each other player has to choose a card to burn and the player who played the attack then gets to play one of those cards. As someone pointed out though, any terminal draw cards are a hard counter to this.

I think it's a really, really cool concept, but could probably be worded more clear and it very likely needs some kind of limiter on it. This would be my suggestion:

(https://i.imgur.com/Mc4DUzP.jpg)

Now the big difference here is the Attacked players can't play their cards for draw, which takes away some of the fun of the original. I think by discarding the cards it makes it more clear that the Attacked players mostly don't get the benefit of the played cards. Also, it's unclear when those played cards get discarded. During that players next Clean-up? There really aren't any rules for this.

You could also try adding some text that specifies things like Coin don't carry over, but that would get wordy.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 11, 2018, 05:07:39 am
The key thing to realize is that they get to play a card non-terminally whereas you don't. So in this respect Pretender is a gift.

But if the card they play is a village it sucks (you get a village, they get a cantrip) for them. Or more generally, all the vanilla stuff except for card draw is wasted. So being forced to play a Smithy seems like a gift.
Here we come to the last issue, handsize attacks. Suppose Alice has Village and Smithy in hand and Bob players Pretender. Alice doesn't want to play the Village as mere cantrip and she doesn't want to play the Smithy lest the Militia hits her afterwards. She wants to keep both Actions in hand but cannot due to Pretender's "Attack".

This is hard to judge but my hunch is that more often that not this is rather a gift than an Attack. The card, or more generally the copy-stuff-from-other-players idea behind it, is very interesting. But I wouldn't categorize it as Attack. Attacks nearly unambiguously always hurt. Sure, you might love Treasure Hunter being hit by Enchantress or love those incoming Curses to feed your Foragers but these are, just like the Knight-Fortess example that faust mentioned, exceptions.
Yes, attacking another player is definitely not the central part of what the card does. I think it still should be attack type (the same way a hypothetical card that gives your opponents Silvers should be an attack) because there will be boards where it can be used to hurt other players. The main goal creating htis was to have a novel kind of attack that isn't just a variation on existing attacks. Another more attack-y idea didn't work out.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 11, 2018, 05:18:53 am
(https://i.imgur.com/Mc4DUzP.jpg)

Now the big difference here is the Attacked players can't play their cards for draw, which takes away some of the fun of the original. I think by discarding the cards it makes it more clear that the Attacked players mostly don't get the benefit of the played cards. Also, it's unclear when those played cards get discarded. During that players next Clean-up? There really aren't any rules for this.

You could also try adding some text that specifies things like Coin don't carry over, but that would get wordy.
Thanks for the feedback! I think a problem with your suggestion is that now the first time it is played, Pretender will be significantly more powerful. Forcing people to discard an Attack is almost Pillage-level strong, so having it on a card that is not a one-shot seems quite problematic.

I think the fact that they don't get benefits that cannot be used out of turn should be clear from the existing ruling on Caravan Guard and tokens. When the cards are discarded is less clear, but the idea is to discard them during that player's next cleanup, which is the first time they really can do so since there are no cleanup phases before that.

It could be that playing mulitples of my version is too strong, but in that case I think I prefer just restricting the effect to players with 4 or more cards in hand rather than doing the discard thing.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on November 11, 2018, 05:51:43 am
(https://s1.ax1x.com/2018/11/11/iqowGD.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 11, 2018, 08:00:53 am
(https://i.imgur.com/JBndjvg.png)

I wanted it to be a $5 cost Throne+ but I think the attack is strong enough that it needs to cost $6.

I really like the concept of players having to weigh what card is best to throne versus what card to get rid of from your opponents hand. It's a relatively simple concept that offers immense strategy.

Unfortunately I do not think such a focused discard attack can be balanced in it's current state. Cards that favor diverse decks are great, but with only 10 Kingdom cards there will always be overlap and you can probably always find 2-3 common cards that when lost would cripple a players hand. I'm thinking mainly about Village cards, +Buy cards, and such. There is just too much chance of a player locking their opponents out of the game with something like this.

I think this is why there are no official cards like this. The closest card would be Raiders and a player has to put a lot of thought and work into their deck before it can function like Regicide.

I'm sure there's a way to salvage this great concept. Making it so only the first Regicide played attacks would go along way towards reigning this in. This would really make players think hard about which card is best to attack and which card is best to throne.

Anyways, thanks for sharing this and good luck!

[EDIT] I also noticed you've changed your image a few times for this. If you're still undecided on it, have a look at this one. I've had it for awhile, but haven't had a card that fits the theme. It's kind of like an undead Procession. Regicide and how your card plays seems like a great fit!

(https://i.imgur.com/GWCOGDo.png)
Artist Credit: Nick Gindraux

That was my thought behind making it unable to target Regicides -- there's always one card with a village effect in the kingdom that can't be attacked. It is definitely a strong card, but I enjoy playing with strong attacks so I don't really mind that. Certainly for a $6 cost attack it falls somewhere between Goons and Raider.

It's possible that having it cost $5 would actually weaken the attack, by making it easier to get that unattackable village. On the other hand, making it $6 means that the attack doesn't start to hit until later in the game (most likely the 4th shuffle instead of the 3rd). I'll have to think about this some more.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on November 11, 2018, 01:50:46 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/jQgmhhC.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on November 11, 2018, 01:52:08 pm
During the age of guilds. The Firth guilds job was to keep the peace. By any means nessesary
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 11, 2018, 03:10:05 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/Mc4DUzP.jpg)

Now the big difference here is the Attacked players can't play their cards for draw, which takes away some of the fun of the original. I think by discarding the cards it makes it more clear that the Attacked players mostly don't get the benefit of the played cards. Also, it's unclear when those played cards get discarded. During that players next Clean-up? There really aren't any rules for this.

You could also try adding some text that specifies things like Coin don't carry over, but that would get wordy.
Thanks for the feedback! I think a problem with your suggestion is that now the first time it is played, Pretender will be significantly more powerful. Forcing people to discard an Attack is almost Pillage-level strong, so having it on a card that is not a one-shot seems quite problematic.

I think the fact that they don't get benefits that cannot be used out of turn should be clear from the existing ruling on Caravan Guard and tokens. When the cards are discarded is less clear, but the idea is to discard them during that player's next cleanup, which is the first time they really can do so since there are no cleanup phases before that.

It could be that playing mulitples of my version is too strong, but in that case I think I prefer just restricting the effect to players with 4 or more cards in hand rather than doing the discard thing.

Also, I left out the +$3 Coin option, but that was unintentional. The more I look at this card the more I like it. I think it just takes a bit for the complexity to sink in. I still highly recommend adding something in parenthesis that states that things like Coin and Buys don't carry over. Sure it's a rule, but I'd say it's one of the most unknown rules in Dominion and adding an explanation would go along way.

So in addition to players being able to keep drawn cards they can also keep Coffers and Villagers tokens. They can also play Attacks, which may harm you. Maybe all these counters justifies being able to attack multiple times with Pretenders?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 11, 2018, 08:10:12 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/jQgmhhC.jpg)
I like this, though I think you mean Frith Guild. I think it's interesting that you can never discard a Frith Guild to another player's Frith Guild, since you would gain a Curse if you had it in your hand. Also, do you want to know the little unimportant errors in the card?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 11, 2018, 08:21:20 pm
Changed Miscreant. Now it's a Woodcutter that only gives the second coin if no one trashed a good card, and the attack doesn't stack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on November 11, 2018, 10:31:46 pm
How bout a fixed spy?
(Can't decide if it should cost (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/32/Coin3.png/16px-Coin3.png) or (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png).)
Quote
Infiltrator
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/32/Coin3.png/16px-Coin3.png) Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player reveals the top card of their deck. If it's an action or treasure costing at least (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png), they discard it. Otherwise, they put it back. If no one discarded a card, +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ClouduHieh on November 12, 2018, 12:02:47 am
Oh whoops yeah I mean frith guild. As for knowing what errors to fix. No thanks. Unless I知 at least a runner up for this contest. Otherwise I値l wait until i decide to upload this to one of my threads.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on November 12, 2018, 12:13:31 am
For this contest, I wanted to come up with an Attack that you don't always want to block (Moat, Lighthouse, etc.). Yes, it might still hurt, but you'd rather not let your opponent gloat too much when they play this...

(https://i.imgur.com/mDFjmVYl.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.

This will usually mean taking a Copper, but that limits the Braggart to a Silver or other $3-cost card. You block this in a 2-player game, and that gives the Braggart an easy $6-cost card, with you getting bupkis. Sometimes, it's better to let the Braggart brag than to try and counter him.

Any feedback is appreciated, as usual. Do you think I need to add "in the supply" to the first clause?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: ConMan on November 12, 2018, 12:56:55 am
For this contest, I wanted to come up with an Attack that you don't always want to block (Moat, Lighthouse, etc.). Yes, it might still hurt, but you'd rather not let your opponent gloat too much when they play this...

(https://i.imgur.com/mDFjmVYl.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.

This will usually mean taking a Copper, but that limits the Braggart to a Silver or other $3-cost card. You block this in a 2-player game, and that gives the Braggart an easy $6-cost card, with you getting bupkis. Sometimes, it's better to let the Braggart brag than to try and counter him.

Any feedback is appreciated, as usual. Do you think I need to add "in the supply" to the first clause?
I'd say yes, it should be in the supply, otherwise I don't think there's anything stopping you from naming a $3 not in the game (or from an empty pile) and just scoring a free $6 of your choice. It's definitely an interesting card idea.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: LibraryAdventurer on November 12, 2018, 01:41:41 am
I think it might be too strong for a (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png)cost card to give you a Goons at the cost of giving other players a silver. Or getting a Mountebank/Wharf/etc at the cost of giving other players a Duchess/Moat/etc.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on November 12, 2018, 09:45:08 am
Thanks for the feedback. Yeah, it does seem a little strong now that I think about it. I'm offering two fixes - making it more expensive, or nerfing the you-gain effect. Let me know which one (if either) you think is better.

(https://i.imgur.com/g9Cq2CNl.png) (https://i.imgur.com/hlHZqgfl.png)

Quote
Braggart (variation 1)
Action/Attack - $5
-
Name an Action or Treasure card in the Supply costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.

Quote
Braggart (variation 2)
Action/Attack - $4
-
Name an Action or Treasure card in the Supply costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than the named card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 12, 2018, 05:07:41 pm
My card Con Artist got an update. It took me a lot of time to make it more balanced in comparsion to Ghost Ship, Torturer and Young Witch, but here is it:

(https://mediacrush.coding4.coffee/storage/V8vwgkYxTGS6.png)

Con Artist
Type: Action - Attack
Cost: $4

+3 Cards
Discard 2 Cards

Each other player reveals their hand. Those with less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from their hand onto their deck.

Illustration: Le Tricheur l'as de carreau by Georges de La Tour
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 12, 2018, 06:03:09 pm
My card Con Artist got an update. It took me a lot of time to make it more balanced in comparsion to Ghost Ship, Torturer and Young Witch, but here is it:

Con Artist
Type: Action - Attack
Cost: $4

+3 Cards
Discard 2 Cards

Each other player reveals their hand. Those with less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from their hand onto their deck.

Illustration: Le Tricheur l'as de carreau by Georges de La Tour
Little wording suggestion: Each player who revealed less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then puts a card from their hand onto their deck. As far as the card itself, I think that should work well.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 12, 2018, 06:41:33 pm
My card Con Artist got an update. It took me a lot of time to make it more balanced in comparsion to Ghost Ship, Torturer and Young Witch, but here is it:

Con Artist
Type: Action - Attack
Cost: $4

+3 Cards
Discard 2 Cards

Each other player reveals their hand. Those with less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from their hand onto their deck.

Illustration: Le Tricheur l'as de carreau by Georges de La Tour
Little wording suggestion: Each player who revealed less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then puts a card from their hand onto their deck. As far as the card itself, I think that should work well.

If we're going to do wording suggestions, it should probably say "fewer than three Coppers" not "less than"
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 13, 2018, 01:07:07 am
My card Con Artist got an update. It took me a lot of time to make it more balanced in comparsion to Ghost Ship, Torturer and Young Witch, but here is it:

Con Artist
Type: Action - Attack
Cost: $4

+3 Cards
Discard 2 Cards

Each other player reveals their hand. Those with less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from their hand onto their deck.

Illustration: Le Tricheur l'as de carreau by Georges de La Tour
Little wording suggestion: Each player who revealed less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then puts a card from their hand onto their deck. As far as the card itself, I think that should work well.

If we're going to do wording suggestions, it should probably say "fewer than three Coppers" not "less than"

I actually had similar wordings, but the text became too tiny, so I wanted to compress it. This is the shortest version I could find.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on November 13, 2018, 08:32:01 pm
Regicide
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $6
You may play an Action from your hand twice. If it's not a Regicide, each other player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a copy of it (or reveals they can't).
The turn-order advantage will probably make Regicide brutal.  There are enough Kingdoms with singular important engine cards that slapping out of hand will be devastating, and if it misses it is functionally because your engine failed this turn.  This might even become a little targeted, as if you Regicide a Regicide a Smithy, you'll get to see all the Actions in the hands of players who don't have Smithy cards before you choose the next Action you'll Regicide.  It is a slick design, though.

Stowaway
Types: Action, Attack, Duration
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Set aside any number of cards from your hand face-up (on this). Each other player gains a copy of one that you choose. At the start of your next turn, put these cards into your hand.
I think Donald X. has said that Estate junking isn't so good because they empty so fast--which is especially no good when other pile-emptying Attacks are around.  Ignoring that, I think Stowaway is way stronger than it looks at a glance.  Because two Stowaway cards can juggle all the junk elements out of your deck forever.  I mean: Any number of cards?  Having a bunch of Stowaway cards can set aside other Stowaway cards to ensure they never misfire.

Tax Collector
Types: Action, Attack, Duration
Cost: $5
+2 Coffers. Until your next turn, when another player plays an Action card with a +$ amount in its text, they take their -$1 token.
This needs a next turn effect so it stays in play.  The Attack is super cool.  I don't like the vanilla bonus very much: Butcher and Villain already do the +2 Coffers thing and I don't want a glut of cards that do that.  Thematic ties to Tax Man make me wish it could trash Treasures somehow.

Purists
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each other player discards down to 2 cards in hand, then draws a card and gets +1 Villager.
The theme is nice, but the Attack doesn't really fit into it: The other players are the purists?  Either way, +1 Villager is better than having a Village, so I think this Attack is actually super weak.  I might cost Purists at $4 so it's more accessible or have it draw 3 Cards so it's stronger but the stacking gets hairy.

Angry Mob
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $3
+$2. Each other player removes a token from their Coffers/Villagers mat. If they don't, they gain a Curse.
Setup: Each player gets +3 Villagers.
Neat concept.  The value of this Attack is going to vary wildly based upon whether or not you can generate Villagers in the Kingdom, so it might be worth figuring some way to inject Villagers other than setup.  I worry that losing Villagers will feel pretty unfun, anyway.

Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on November 13, 2018, 11:53:07 pm
Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.

Hmm, good points, Fragasnap. How about this? (I'll make a mock-up later)

(https://i.imgur.com/WfaKWill.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Gain a card other than Braggart costing up to $4. Each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Without good $2 cards in the Supply, this will almost always be a junker crossed with a Workshop. Certain boards will still make this an Attack you might want to get hit with sometimes. What do you think?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GreyEK on November 14, 2018, 01:07:56 am
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/479797320419115029/512145530013351936/Arms_Dealer.png)

War keeps anything from being perfect, including player's decks.  Maybe your opponent's gotten a bit more thin than you'd like them to be,
well perhaps trashing some stuff out of their deck would help.  And you get to help thin yourself too!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 14, 2018, 01:08:14 am
Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.

Hmm, good points, Fragasnap. How about this? (I'll make a mock-up later)

(https://i.imgur.com/WfaKWill.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Gain a card other than Braggart costing up to $4. Each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Without good $2 cards in the Supply, this will almost always be a junker crossed with a Workshop. Certain boards will still make this an Attack you might want to get hit with sometimes. What do you think?

Copper Junking is not as bad. I think, this card is much worse than Bureaucrat.

(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/479797320419115029/512145530013351936/Arms_Dealer.png)

War keeps anything from being perfect, including player's decks.  Maybe your opponent's gotten a bit more thin than you'd like them to be,
well perhaps trashing some stuff out of their deck would help.  And you get to help thin yourself too!

This actually helps your opponents to get rid of Estates. In a 3 player game, all Arms Dealers are gone after the third play. I don't like this. Later on, this is a Workshop plus trashing Cutpurse. Horrible ...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: GreyEK on November 14, 2018, 01:22:02 am
This actually helps your opponents to get rid of Estates. In a 3 player game, all Arms Dealers are gone after the third play. I don't like this. Later on, this is a Workshop plus trashing Cutpurse. Horrible ...

Oh god, that's right.
People actually play multiplayer.

In response to your other point, you definitely don't get this before your opponent has gotten thin.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 14, 2018, 08:19:22 am
I don't really like my current submission, so I'm going to cancel that one and make another one. Quick question for anyone in particular: We all know that Masquerade doesn't count as an Attack, but if only each other player had to pass a card would that make it an attack? There's other parts to my idea, but would that by itself be an Attack?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 14, 2018, 08:50:35 am
I don't really like my current submission, so I'm going to cancel that one and make another one. Quick question for anyone in particular: We all know that Masquerade doesn't count as an Attack, but if only each other player had to pass a card would that make it an attack? There's other parts to my idea, but would that by itself be an Attack?

If you reveal Moat, are you skipped when passing cards? Do you receive a card, but not pass any? The other way around? Arguably, Minion "attacks" you just as much as the other players, and I wouldn't expect a self-Cursing Witch to be anything but an attack, either. So, to more or less answer your question: I wouldn't expect such a card to win this round.

Speaking of which, I am going to pick the winner in about 24 hours.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on November 14, 2018, 09:39:12 am
Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.

Hmm, good points, Fragasnap. How about this? (I'll make a mock-up later)

(https://i.imgur.com/WfaKWill.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Gain a card other than Braggart costing up to $4. Each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Without good $2 cards in the Supply, this will almost always be a junker crossed with a Workshop. Certain boards will still make this an Attack you might want to get hit with sometimes. What do you think?

Copper Junking is not as bad. I think, this card is much worse than Bureaucrat.

How is it worse than Bureaucrat? Just curious as to how these compare.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: crlundy on November 14, 2018, 12:19:11 pm
My card Con Artist got an update. It took me a lot of time to make it more balanced in comparsion to Ghost Ship, Torturer and Young Witch, but here is it:

Con Artist
Type: Action - Attack
Cost: $4

+3 Cards
Discard 2 Cards

Each other player reveals their hand. Those with less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from their hand onto their deck.

Illustration: Le Tricheur l'as de carreau by Georges de La Tour
Little wording suggestion: Each player who revealed less than three Coppers gain a Copper to their hand, then puts a card from their hand onto their deck. As far as the card itself, I think that should work well.

If we're going to do wording suggestions, it should probably say "fewer than three Coppers" not "less than"

I actually had similar wordings, but the text became too tiny, so I wanted to compress it. This is the shortest version I could find.

Dominion would usually say "2 or fewer" instead of "fewer than 3". Here's my suggestion, though you may not like that the discarding is not its own paragraph, or that "it" is potentially confusing:

Quote
+3 Cards

Discard 2 cards. Each other player may reveal that their hand has 3 or more Coppers. If they don't, they gain a Copper to their hand, then put a card from it onto their deck.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 14, 2018, 01:48:19 pm
Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.

Hmm, good points, Fragasnap. How about this? (I'll make a mock-up later)

(https://i.imgur.com/WfaKWill.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Gain a card other than Braggart costing up to $4. Each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Without good $2 cards in the Supply, this will almost always be a junker crossed with a Workshop. Certain boards will still make this an Attack you might want to get hit with sometimes. What do you think?

Copper Junking is not as bad. I think, this card is much worse than Bureaucrat.

How is it worse than Bureaucrat? Just curious as to how these compare.

Bureaucrat is a weak gainer with an a moderate handsize attack. It's a poor card overall. If you are playing Base Set only, it is a goid pick in Gardens vs Gardens, though.

Braggart, however, has better gaining, but a horrible attack. Copper junking is not as bad. Copper always gives you $1 if you draw it and  a hand of 5 Coppers is not the worst hand, because you can at buy powerful actions and Duchies.

However Bureaucrat's attack is much more nasty. It can force you to return your Copper to your deck again and again, letting you play with 4 usable cards only. Given your opponent has a 15 card deck, the Copper only weakens every third draw. Bureaucrats topdecking can be repeated much easier and slows the opponent's deck more down. Unlike Curse and Estate, Copper is not a dead card and it is even better than most Ruins (Ruined Market is an edge case). That is the point.

I also submitted a Copper junker, but my card comes with a handsize attack and it has an ability to prevent most pins which also prevents the 5 Copper hand.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 14, 2018, 04:13:18 pm
Braggart
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $4
Name an Action or Treasure card costing up to $3. Each other player gains a copy of it. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than the named card.
The power jump from $4 to $5 is so large that this style of Attack really needs to give other players the option of what they want to gain to be even close to appropriately balanced.  Also anything that can cause a lot of cards to be gained by players I think needs to prevent players from gaining copies of itself to prevent easy pile-running.

Hmm, good points, Fragasnap. How about this? (I'll make a mock-up later)

(https://i.imgur.com/WfaKWill.png)

Quote
Braggart
Action/Attack - $4
-
Gain a card other than Braggart costing up to $4. Each other player gains a card costing at most $2 less than it.

Without good $2 cards in the Supply, this will almost always be a junker crossed with a Workshop. Certain boards will still make this an Attack you might want to get hit with sometimes. What do you think?

Copper Junking is not as bad. I think, this card is much worse than Bureaucrat.

How is it worse than Bureaucrat? Just curious as to how these compare.

Bureaucrat is a weak gainer with an a moderate handsize attack. It's a poor card overall. If you are playing Base Set only, it is a goid pick in Gardens vs Gardens, though.

Braggart, however, has better gaining, but a horrible attack. Copper junking is not as bad. Copper always gives you $1 if you draw it and  a hand of 5 Coppers is not the worst hand, because you can at buy powerful actions and Duchies.

However Bureaucrat's attack is much more nasty. It can force you to return your Copper to your deck again and again, letting you play with 4 usable cards only. Given your opponent has a 15 card deck, the Copper only weakens every third draw. Bureaucrats topdecking can be repeated much easier and slows the opponent's deck more down. Unlike Curse and Estate, Copper is not a dead card and it is even better than most Ruins (Ruined Market is an edge case). That is the point.

I also submitted a Copper junker, but my card comes with a handsize attack and it has an ability to prevent most pins which also prevents the 5 Copper hand.

I disagree completely.  Bureaucrat's attack is not very good at all.  In a game with any trashing, I'll get rid of my estates and Bureaucrat won't do anything to me at all until I start greening.  At that point my deck can handle it.  Gaining any junk card, and yes Coppers are most definitely junk cards, is often far worse.  Even if a hand of 5 coppers can get you a decent card, as you said, you won't get to that card as often if you keep gaining Coppers.  We all know that trashing is the most important thing in Dominion.  Gaining junk is the opposite of that. Junking is a brutal attack.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 14, 2018, 04:45:34 pm
Bureaucrat is mainly weak due to the Silver gaining. The Attack in and of itself is fine although slightly weaker than the more reliable Fortune Teller. But in rare instances Bureaucrat Attacks do stack.
All of this has nothing to do with Braggart which is a bad design. In Kingdoms with decent $2s it is a Workshop that hands out free gifts, in Shepherd games it is a Workshop that hands out very nice gifts and only otherwise (or once the respective piles are empty) it is a Copper junker which is the mildest form of junking.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on November 14, 2018, 05:02:17 pm
Purists
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $5
+2 Cards. Each other player discards down to 2 cards in hand, then draws a card and gets +1 Villager.
The theme is nice, but the Attack doesn't really fit into it: The other players are the purists?  Either way, +1 Villager is better than having a Village, so I think this Attack is actually super weak.  I might cost Purists at $4 so it's more accessible or have it draw 3 Cards so it's stronger but the stacking gets hairy.
This is true, it's like each other player gets a 4 card hand where one is Necropolis. So that leads me to a change I wish to make to my entry. Can't do a mockup just now:

Quote
Enforcer - Action Attack, $5 cost.
+2 Cards
Each other player discards down to 2 cards in hand, then chooses either +1 Villager or +1 Coffers.
Purists wouldn't really hand out money, so here's a person enforcing and rewarding a small hand law.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 14, 2018, 05:04:10 pm
Here is a quick shot at a mitigated Knight attack:

(https://i.imgur.com/pev6JWN.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 14, 2018, 06:54:54 pm
Alright, I changed my entry now. It's a reverse Druid, each other player has the choice between three hexes. I hop it's not too weak. I played around with different vanilla bonuses and this one seemed the best.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 14, 2018, 08:05:24 pm
Here is a quick shot at a mitigated Knight attack:

(https://i.imgur.com/pev6JWN.jpg)

Mitigated? This seems more brutal than the Knights, possibly much more brutal. With the Knights you're relieved if you can feed them a Silver instead of one of your precious actions. Here that's not possible, and then it Sea Hags you a Ruin as well... Yyyyyikes! They can hit the Ruins themselves, of course, but that seems about on par with the Mountebank block clause; it only makes Mountebank a bit less scary.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 15, 2018, 12:54:47 am
Updated Pretender (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg776720#msg776720) so that it now only attacks 5-card hands.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 15, 2018, 03:01:47 am
(https://i.imgur.com/EbJcK2g.png)

Here's my revised entry, an Action-Attack-Duration!  Stowaway is sort of a mashup of Gear and Ambassador: you save cards from this hand for next hand, and give a copy of one of them to your opponents.  Early game, this will neatly keep Estates and extra Coppers out of your shuffles while junking the other players, though being a duration means it only works every other turn.  In the mid and late game, a pair of these can function as handy utility cards to keep your shuffles clean, as well as set up big turns, just be sure to keep some junk around to hand out copies of (or perhaps a Province when you're ready to end the game).

*Revised to change to an Action type instead of Night, so to fit within the parameters of this week's contest.

To me, this is the best card, and it痴 not even close. I壇 love to play with it! Some reasons:

1.) Its constructive part is imho the most interesting one in this weeks competition. You can

It痴 gear on steroids, without being terminal. There might be 電ouble stowaway decks similar to 電ouble tac - but without the nasty 電iscard your hand part.

2.) The card seems balanced to me.
Despite having a very interesting constructive part and a strong attack, I don稚 think it痴 OP, because it is a duration and doesn稚 draw, which is both a huge downside.

3.) It defends against itself via pseudotrashing.
Unlike other junk attacks, the game needn稚 turn into a slog.

4.) I like games encouraging to buy curses.
This is always an interesting mini-game for me.



Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 15, 2018, 04:04:39 am
Mitigated? This seems more brutal than the Knights, possibly much more brutal. With the Knights you're relieved if you can feed them a Silver instead of one of your precious actions. Here that's not possible, and then it Sea Hags you a Ruin as well... Yyyyyikes! They can hit the Ruins themselves, of course, but that seems about on par with the Mountebank block clause; it only makes Mountebank a bit less scary.
I disagree completely. If you play an engine you will only have a few Silvers in your deck and it is more likely that Knights hit Actions. Just play a Knights game and take a look in the trash at the end of the game. I bet that the ratio of Actions to non-Copper Treasures is around 2:1 or 3:1.

This Attack only hits, on average, every two times. Sea Hagging a Ruins sounds quite nasty whereas exchanging an Action for a Ruins that hedges you against the next Mob Attack sounds pretty sweet. This is especially relevant in multiplayer and when somebody goes for several Mobs.
No idea about the Mountebank comparison as it is just the other way around with Mountebank: you often want 2 as the second one being played during one turn has a higher chance of hitting than the first one. With Mob it is the other way around, the second one has zero chance of hitting.

Also, non-trivially, Mob doesn't hurt BM players. I recently made another Attack which doesn't hurt BM (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18202.msg776587#msg776587) and Kudasai rightly pointed out that this could be a huge issue. So if the card has any serious issues it is precisely this, namely that there is a simple way to avoid the Attack totally.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 15, 2018, 06:03:40 am
Also, non-trivially, Mob doesn't hurt BM players. I recently made another Attack which doesn't hurt BM (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18202.msg776587#msg776587) and Kudasai rightly pointed out that this could be a huge issue. So if the card has any serious issues it is precisely this, namely that there is a simple way to avoid the Attack totally.

There is precedent for Attacks that do not hurt BM in Enchantress. I don't think it's an issue per se, only if the card is strong enough to actually force BM on a large chunk of boards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 15, 2018, 09:17:16 am
About Drunkard, it generally counts as an Attack to make opponents take something bad (e.g. "Miserable" or their "-1 Card" Token). Taking that bad thing is what Moat keeps from happening.

Drunkard however is not taken, it is given. I find it unclear how Moat should interact with this, as the hit player technically isn't told to do anything.

OK - kind of like how Masquerade isn't an Attack, then?

I've reworded Drunkard to be "The player to your left takes this card into their play area", does that work for you?

Sorry for taking so long to reply to this.

Not really like Masquerade... More like, uh, Possession? Or if Ambassador told you to put the card in another player's discard pile instead of making them gain it, or if Swindler had you trash the cards from the top of other players' decks... It just seems like something you don't want to create an precedent for if you can avoid it. "Hey, I am not affected, does that mean my play area is not affected?". If it's YOU doing stuff when attacked, then you not being affected is more clear. So yes, I will accept the new wording.

That said, I'm writing up the results right now...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 15, 2018, 10:01:43 am
Mitigated? This seems more brutal than the Knights, possibly much more brutal. With the Knights you're relieved if you can feed them a Silver instead of one of your precious actions. Here that's not possible, and then it Sea Hags you a Ruin as well... Yyyyyikes! They can hit the Ruins themselves, of course, but that seems about on par with the Mountebank block clause; it only makes Mountebank a bit less scary.
I disagree completely. If you play an engine you will only have a few Silvers in your deck and it is more likely that Knights hit Actions. Just play a Knights game and take a look in the trash at the end of the game. I bet that the ratio of Actions to non-Copper Treasures is around 2:1 or 3:1.

This Attack only hits, on average, every two times. Sea Hagging a Ruins sounds quite nasty whereas exchanging an Action for a Ruins that hedges you against the next Mob Attack sounds pretty sweet. This is especially relevant in multiplayer and when somebody goes for several Mobs.
No idea about the Mountebank comparison as it is just the other way around with Mountebank: you often want 2 as the second one being played during one turn has a higher chance of hitting than the first one. With Mob it is the other way around, the second one has zero chance of hitting.

Also, non-trivially, Mob doesn't hurt BM players. I recently made another Attack which doesn't hurt BM (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18202.msg776587#msg776587) and Kudasai rightly pointed out that this could be a huge issue. So if the card has any serious issues it is precisely this, namely that there is a simple way to avoid the Attack totally.
I think Mob is about balanced in most games, but when there's things that don't cost $3-$6, i.e. Potion cost cards, $7 cost cards, that are pretty hard to get, that's where Mob can be too strong, since it could hit one player's Ruin and another player's Kings Court or Possession. Also, "If they did trash trashed"
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 15, 2018, 10:51:03 am
That said, I'm writing up the results right now...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 15, 2018, 12:38:13 pm
Sorry for taking so long. I was torn between several cards. Also, I was writing it up at work, and stuff happened...

So, about all of them, in alphabetical order (sorry for the lack of links, I'm rushing down right now).

Angry Mob:
Seems very good for 3$. I like the Villagers better than the Coffers variant, but removing Villagers still kind of feels like it should cost 4$ (assuming a roughly similar strength to Coffers, this is roughly Cutpurse levels). And you can even open two of these. Even if they collide, you steal more tokens from your opponents than you need to play both. Once an opponent's Villagers run out, this is 5$ material, too.

Arms Dealer:
This has the same issue most trash-from-hand attacks have: It helps your opponents most of the time. And if you ever manage to make them trash a good card, like by playing a Militia first, it can be really harsh. Also, yes, multiplayer is a thing.

Braggart:
It's fine, but I feel a non-attack version that makes you gain a card costing up to 6$, with each other player being allowed to gain a card costing 2$ or 3$ less, would be a better variant of this base idea.

Con Artist:
Much better with the changed wording, as now early hands with Coppers can actually block the attack. The fact that it doesn't hit players with 3 or more Coppers in hand also makes it unlikely to hit early, where replacing a card in hand with a Copper is most likely to help them. Still, it kind of bothers me that the attack is double-edged, after all.

Curfew:
You can't really skip this because of the huge bonus it gives, and the fact that the attack only harms users of the attack (unless there are much more expensive ways to use that token) makes it not really less mandatory. It's a bit too self-absorbed for my taste.

Cursed Tome
Love the flavor here, although arguably a Tome sounds like a Treasure. My main gripe here is that I think it would be more easy to trigger and less board dependent if it used a Cornucopia-esque "4 or more differently named cards in hand" to trigger  cursing. Still a favourite from the start.

Demagogue:
Appears harsh at first, but people still have the option to choose. It follows a similar design idea as my Necromancer, without recycling the knights attack. Well, and Necromancer again is basically a Rogue variant. I'm not sure why I'm not really feeling this. It's a fine design.

Drunkard:
Bonus points for the originality. However, this is still a directed attack that only hits one player. It also delivers the revenge to the attack with itself, meaning it doesn't really provide a bonus to gain this.

Enforcer:
Another cute one. I originally was afraid the bonus was a bit too friendly when comparing the card to Legionary, but at the same time I feel that a 2 card hand is rather cruel. This isn't bad, but the brutality of the discard makes me feel it wouldn't be horribly much fun to play.

Extortionist:
A bigger Cutpurse. Not half bad. The only flaw this has is that it's a bit uninteresting compared to some other cards.

Frith Guild:
Fine. However, I feel this would be better if it made you discard to 4 either way. First, it allows getting rid of an Attack card to dodge further attacks, and also it would allow triggering Firth Guild itself.

Heretic:
Another one that seems kinda cool in principle, but it also looks a tad weak. Perhaps if it drew two to discard two, like Young Witch? Or if it was +2$, +1 Villager base for 5$. Terminal +1 Card is just really, really bad.

Infiltrator:
Also okay, but being a "fixed" Spy it doesn't seem overly interesting, and, like Spy, a tad too slow for a cantrip.

Land Dealer:
This is also perfectly fine, but another one that just didn't excite me much. And of course it's limited to only a few uses before it stops doing anything.

Mob:
I agree that this feels very oppressive, and the fact that playing BM allows you to dodge this completely doesn't make it better. I also don't like that this hits double if it hits. I'd probably like it more if it gave the attacked player a choice between trashing OR gaining a Ruins.

Negotiation:
A bit like a one-turn Embargo... I feel considering its cost and the fact that it might actually be so no other player even wanted to gain that card (and you can't block Victory cards) it's too weak. Also, it should probably say "At the start of your next turn" instead of "When you discard this from play". Not bad, anyhow.

Pretender:
I agree to the issue that often this won't feel like an attack. Sure, it sucks to play +Coin cards, but +Card cards become awesome. It also leads to issues if another player plays an Attack or a Throne Room + another Pretender. Like Braggart, I feel this would be better if it were a non-attack implementation of the core concept.

Regicide
This was one of the cards I was torn between. I like the novelty of the attack. My main worry was that it could lead to unpleasant experiences, because that kind of attack tends to whiff and if it doesn't, it feels really annoying to be hit by it. The first player advantage I think is mitigated a tad by the cost of 6$, but in general I'm not a huge fan of this kind of attack. Sorry, but that's the thing with jury decisions - they are very subjective. A grand submission anyhow.

Sorcerer:
I like this a lot! Obviously if one of the Hexes is Miserable, this is just a terminal Coffers very quickly. In fact, the actual bonus is a bit meh to me; Coffers are everywhere these days. Also, the base idea has been thrown around in the forums already (by you, perhaps?). So that's going against it... Apart from that, cool.

Stowaway
Glad you decided to put the attacking part in the current turn. It's a slightly more aggressive Haven/tactician, so my main gripe is that it doesn't feel terribly innovative. Otherwise it's neat.

Tax Collector:
This seems too brutal to me. I also believe that to make it it feel less brutal, you would have to change it in a way that would make it resemble other cards like Bridge Troll too much. Or, I gues, make it a one-shot? It's innovative, so that's a plus.



The finale was a triple between Regicide, Sorcerer and Cursed Tome.

The winner is Cursed Tome by GazBag. Congrats and thank you to everyone who participated.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 15, 2018, 12:39:28 pm
Wow, top three! Also, someone else must have thrown it around, this is the first time I put it it on an actual card. I wanted to do something simple like Druid is, but just +1 Buy and an attack seems rather lame, so I added a Coffer. I'll try to think of something better.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on November 16, 2018, 05:33:21 pm
Oh I wasn't expecting to win this, thanks for liking the card Asper!

Non-supply card
A new non-supply card and a card (or cards I suppose) that showcases that non-supply card. It could be something like Vampire/Bats  with 2 intertwined cards or something more like Spoils or Wishes, or something new and unique that I haven't thought of. It's strictly one non-supply card, so no Travellers and I'm also going to say no Heirloom/Shelters type things too.

If anything is unclear just shout at me and I'll try to explain better!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 16, 2018, 08:07:31 pm
Oh I wasn't expecting to win this, thanks for liking the card Asper!

Non-supply card
A new non-supply card and a card (or cards I suppose) that showcases that non-supply card. It could be something like Vampire/Bats  with 2 intertwined cards or something more like Spoils or Wishes, or something new and unique that I haven't thought of. It's strictly one non-supply card, so no Travellers and I'm also going to say no Heirloom/Shelters type things too.

If anything is unclear just shout at me and I'll try to explain better!
Holy cow! A while ago I was thinking of if I won what my challenge would be, and this was exactly it. Amazing. Anyway, are we allowed to make two cards to get the non-supply card, or make a split pile or something?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on November 17, 2018, 01:09:46 am
Heretic
$4
+1 Card
+1 Villager
If you have 4 or more villagers, each opponent gains a curse.

Heretic:
Another one that seems kinda cool in principle, but it also looks a tad weak. Perhaps if it drew two to discard two, like Young Witch? Or if it was +2$, +1 Villager base for 5$. Terminal +1 Card is just really, really bad.

Man, +1 villager +1 card is better than +1 action +1 card.
It is a non-terminal curser which requires some build-up.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: silvern on November 17, 2018, 02:58:25 am
My attempt:

(https://i.imgur.com/RDfq7aRm.png) (https://i.imgur.com/wD9BZoOm.png)

(I note there's a typo--should say "per Flower Seller [singular] that you have")

EDIT: A good question to be asked: how many flower sellers are there? The answer: equal to the number of avenues in the supply (which itself follows standard victory card rules).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on November 17, 2018, 03:58:02 am
Quote
Message
Action $4*
+2 Cards
+1 Action
You may discard a Courier. If you don't, return this to the Message pile.
(This is not in the supply)

Quote
Courier
Action $3
+ $2
Gain a Message from the Message pile.

There are 10 messages
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Asper on November 17, 2018, 04:00:15 am
Heretic
$4
+1 Card
+1 Villager
If you have 4 or more villagers, each opponent gains a curse.

Heretic:
Another one that seems kinda cool in principle, but it also looks a tad weak. Perhaps if it drew two to discard two, like Young Witch? Or if it was +2$, +1 Villager base for 5$. Terminal +1 Card is just really, really bad.

Man, +1 villager +1 card is better than +1 action +1 card.
It is a non-terminal curser which requires some build-up.

Sure, but you have to play it as terminal +1 Card at least three times first, which really sucks. Anyhow, I didn't pick my winner for balance reasons. I just excluded cards that I thought were in principle unbalancable.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 17, 2018, 04:01:49 am
Quote
Message
Action $4*
+2 Cards
+1 Action
You may discard a Messenger. If you don't, return this to the Message pile.
(This is not in the supply)
Quote
Messenger
Action $3
+ $2
Gain a Message from the Message pile.
Messenger is already a card name.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on November 17, 2018, 04:06:46 am
Sorry, I was thinking "Courier" when I came up with the idea, typed the wrong synonym. Fixed.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fragasnap on November 17, 2018, 07:59:26 am
(https://i.imgur.com/KFMAlBX.png) (https://i.imgur.com/Lxnwpha.png)
Quote
Demagogue
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card, +3 Actions. Victory cards cost $1 less this turn, but not less than $0. Each other player may trash an Action costing at least $5 from their hand. If they do, they gain an Assassin from the Assassin pile, putting it into their hand.
Quote
Assassin
Types: Action, Attack
Cost: $0*
+1 Action, +$3. Each other player trashes a Demagogue from their hand (or reveals a hand with no Demagogue cards in it). If anyone does, exchange this for an Action costing at least $5 from the trash.
(This is not in the Supply.)
There are 6 Assassin cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 17, 2018, 01:39:16 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/dxxqMwH.png)(https://i.imgur.com/JjfgLTK.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Aquila on November 17, 2018, 05:21:31 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/yTsJCK8.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/dCWAI4C.jpg)

Redevelop may be a bit too hard to get.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MattLee on November 18, 2018, 12:37:40 am
(https://preview.ibb.co/dvnUvL/ox.png) (https://preview.ibb.co/hQmYN0/oxen.png)

Note the original concept could add a 3rd ox to the yoke to make a herd, but it wouldn't be as clean and doesn't fit the rules of this contest.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 18, 2018, 04:50:50 am
Removed - i am unable to balance the concept. Feel free to do so :)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 18, 2018, 04:54:27 am

Time to think about our pension, and raise some children!

My design tries to implicit that it takes a huge effort to do so, makes you lose a lot of time, but can eventually pay off big.

Obviously, to suit the given cards, each player has a pension mat:


Bride, Action, 4$

+ 2 Actions
+2 cards per child on your pension mat

Gain a Child.



Child, Action, 0*
[*not in the supply]

+ 2 coffers

You may put this on your pension mat for 6 coffers.
If you do, +4 VP
I think the flavor implications of buying multiple Brides for the sole purpose of impregnating them and have them raise children easily beat Harem in terms of offensiveness.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 18, 2018, 10:23:23 am

Time to think about our pension, and raise some children!

My design tries to implicit that it takes a huge effort to do so, makes you lose a lot of time, but can eventually pay off big.

Obviously, to suit the given cards, each player has a pension mat:


Bride, Action, 4$

+ 2 Actions
+2 cards per child on your pension mat

Gain a Child.



Child, Action, 0*
[*not in the supply]

+ 2 coffers

You may put this on your pension mat for 6 coffers.
If you do, +4 VP
8 Coffers and 4VP would be crazy even if Child did not buff NecropolisBride.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 18, 2018, 03:29:45 pm

Time to think about our pension, and raise some children!

My design tries to implicit that it takes a huge effort to do so, makes you lose a lot of time, but can eventually pay off big.

Obviously, to suit the given cards, each player has a pension mat:


Bride, Action, 4$

+ 2 Actions
+2 cards per child on your pension mat

Gain a Child.



Child, Action, 0*
[*not in the supply]

+ 2 coffers

You may put this on your pension mat for 6 coffers.
If you do, +4 VP
8 Coffers and 4VP would be crazy even if Child did not buff NecropolisBride.

Oh, maybe I should reword it, you should pay 6 coffers, not gain them.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on November 18, 2018, 05:15:27 pm

Time to think about our pension, and raise some children!

My design tries to implicit that it takes a huge effort to do so, makes you lose a lot of time, but can eventually pay off big.

Obviously, to suit the given cards, each player has a pension mat:


Bride, Action, 4$

+ 2 Actions
+2 cards per child on your pension mat

Gain a Child.



Child, Action, 0*
[*not in the supply]

+ 2 coffers

You may put this on your pension mat for 6 coffers.
If you do, +4 VP
I think the flavor implications of buying multiple Brides for the sole purpose of impregnating them and have them raise children easily beat Harem in terms of offensiveness.

Yes, but it's historically accurate!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 18, 2018, 06:05:54 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/dxxqMwH.png)(https://i.imgur.com/JjfgLTK.png)

Why don't you just move the "to your hand" to Day Worker's On-gain effect? Other cards like Mine or Explorer also gain other cards to your hand.



Edit: And here comes my card suggestion:
Archaeologist
Type: Action
Cost: $6

+3 Cards

You may return an Excavation Piece from your hand to the Excavation Piece pile. If you do: +1 Card +1 Action, else: gain an Excavation Piece from the Excavation Piece pile.

Excavation Piece
Type: Treasure/Victory
Cost: $0*
$1
0 VP
--
When scoring: If you have 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 Excavation Pieces, you get 1/2/3/5/8/13/21/34 VP.
(This is not in the supply.)

There are only 8 Excavation Pieces in the game.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 18, 2018, 10:46:36 pm
Might as well be the one to ask: what's the reasoning behind the unnecessarily convoluted Fibonacci score system? And did you mean to type 34 instead of 24?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 19, 2018, 01:12:58 am
Might as well be the one to ask: what's the reasoning behind the unnecessarily convoluted Fibonacci score system? And did you mean to type 34 instead of 24?

1) You have the choice: Junking your deck or returning junk for a a double Lab. Eventually you are rewarded for playing with a hard-to-play deck full of junk cards. Archaeologist has +3 Cards (or +3 Cards, return ExP, +1 Card +1 Action) to  help you digging through your  deck. The more Excavation Pieces, the harder this is, so the Victory points increase per Excavation Piece.

In my first try they gave VP in ascending order, the first one in the pile had 1 VP, the last one had 8 VP. This was fun, but also not very fair, as one player could snatch the 5 to 8 VP cards very easily and return the rest. My submitted variant fixes this.

2) Yes, it was a typo. 34 is the maximum and means 4 シ VP per Excavation piece.

I wanted to have a hybrid of Goons and Lab and that's it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 19, 2018, 02:21:44 am


When scoring: If you have 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 Excavation Pieces, you get 1/2/3/5/8/13/21/34 VP.
(This is not in the supply.)

There are only 8 Excavation Pieces in the game.

How about  典his is worth 1 VP for every 2 Excavation Pieces you have (round down)?
This version scores 0/2/3/8/10/18/21/32, which is similar, but less weird for those which are unfamiliar with Fibonacci.


Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 19, 2018, 02:43:49 am
(https://i.imgur.com/mw6rPDw.jpg)  (https://i.imgur.com/8hAq5uj.jpg)

There are 20 Workers.

EDIT: I decided Factory needed a buff, so it gives $1 more and can't hand out the draw token anymore.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Doom_Shark on November 19, 2018, 05:01:35 am
Hall of Fame is up! (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19239.msg777727#msg777727) Link added to the op as well
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 19, 2018, 05:20:40 am
Archaeologist
Type: Action
Cost: $6

+3 Cards

You may return an Excavation Piece from your hand to the Excavation Piece pile. If you do: +1 Card +1 Action, else: gain an Excavation Piece from the Excavation Piece pile.

Excavation Piece
Type: Treasure/Victory
Cost: $0*
$1
0 VP
--
When scoring: If you have 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 Excavation Pieces, you get 1/2/3/5/8/13/21/34 VP.
(This is not in the supply.)

There are only 8 Excavation Pieces in the game.
I like this, it reminds me of Wild Hunt, but has a different twist. I'm not sure if the Excavation pieces really also need to be Coppers. And they probably do not need to say "0 VP". I would find it hilarious if they read "Worth ((1 + sqrt(5))^n - (1 -sqrt(5))^n)/(2^n sqrt(5)) VP, where n is the number of Excavation pieces you have".
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 19, 2018, 05:26:50 am
Yes, but it's historically accurate!
Then of course it goes nicely with the Witches, Bridge Trolls, Pixies and neatly dressed Groundskeepers.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 19, 2018, 06:00:05 am
(https://i.imgur.com/ryTksOw.png)  (https://i.imgur.com/UUlb6pb.png)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 19, 2018, 10:53:19 am
(https://i.imgur.com/ryTksOw.png)  (https://i.imgur.com/UUlb6pb.png)

Niiiiiiiice, I really like this one. And I see what you did there with the on-trash.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 19, 2018, 11:18:48 am
Oak-Acorn seems too strong. With deck-drawing, it's an activated Conspirator (with an additional option). And if you don't draw your Acorn the same turn, this is still a better outcome than not activating your Conspirator.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: hypercube on November 19, 2018, 02:16:10 pm
Oak-Acorn seems too strong. With deck-drawing, it's an activated Conspirator (with an additional option). And if you don't draw your Acorn the same turn, this is still a better outcome than not activating your Conspirator.

I like it costing $4 with the slowness hopefully providing enough of a drawback to put it on the Conspirator坊assal鳳eddler power level. I'm open to suggestions as to how to make it a bit slower.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 19, 2018, 02:29:45 pm
Archaeologist
Type: Action
Cost: $6

+3 Cards

You may return an Excavation Piece from your hand to the Excavation Piece pile. If you do: +1 Card +1 Action, else: gain an Excavation Piece from the Excavation Piece pile.

Excavation Piece
Type: Treasure/Victory
Cost: $0*
$1
0 VP
--
When scoring: If you have 1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8 Excavation Pieces, you get 1/2/3/5/8/13/21/34 VP.
(This is not in the supply.)

There are only 8 Excavation Pieces in the game.
I like this, it reminds me of Wild Hunt, but has a different twist. I'm not sure if the Excavation pieces really also need to be Coppers. And they probably do not need to say "0 VP". I would find it hilarious if they read "Worth ((1 + sqrt(5))^n - (1 -sqrt(5))^n)/(2^n sqrt(5)) VP, where n is the number of Excavation pieces you have".

Overgrown Estate also has 0 VP and I added this, to avoid confusion. You only count the VP for Excavation Pieces once and not per card.

Your function has a complex value for a non-integer number of cards. You could also present it as a continued fraction.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Chappy7 on November 19, 2018, 03:47:57 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/i2X1w8E.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/rEJZYL5.jpg)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: NoMoreFun on November 20, 2018, 12:50:36 am
Consorts
Action - $5
Set aside any number of Actions from your hand. If you set aside:
2+ - Play them all in any order
1 - Play it twice
0 - Gain a Royal Favour from its pile

Royal Favour
Action - $0*
+1 Card
You may set this aside to play an Action from your hand 3 times. Return this to the Royal Favour pile when you that action leaves play.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: artless on November 20, 2018, 06:11:31 am
Lunatic
$4
+2 Cards
Trash a card from your hand.
---
When you trash this, gain a Conjurator

Conjurator
$4*
Play a face up, non-Duration Action card from the trash twice, leaving it there and turning it face down for the turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 20, 2018, 06:15:39 am
(https://i.imgur.com/8rnCMdn.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/gJoDt6X.jpg)

Quote
Plotter
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card
+1 Villager per Plotter you have in play (counting this)
You may spend 5 Villagers and trash this to gain a Gunpowder Plot.

Gunpowder Plot
Types: Night
Cost: $0*
+1 Buy
Trash this. If you do:
Return to your Action Phase.  Until the end of your turn, if you play an action, trash it.  Play each action you have in play.
(This is not in the supply)

CLARIFICATION: You don't get the actions from the Villagers you spend to gain a Gunpowder Plot.

The OP version of this card always gave you one villager.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Watno on November 20, 2018, 12:58:36 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/5eQ4joW.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/rcsS4Fu.jpg)

Thereare 30 copies of Witch Bottle.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on November 20, 2018, 02:14:28 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/WqCHuqD.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/rcsS4Fu.jpg)

Thereare 30 copies of Witch Bottle.

Superstitious Witch should be an Attack card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Watno on November 20, 2018, 02:18:45 pm
fixed
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 20, 2018, 02:53:42 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/E9cMrld.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/gJoDt6X.jpg)

Quote
Plotter
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card
+1 Villager
You may spend 5 Villagers and trash this to gain a Gunpowder Plot.

Gunpowder Plot
Types: Night
Cost: $0*
+1 Buy
Trash this. If you do:
Return to your Action Phase.  Until the end of your turn, if you play an action, trash it.  Play each action you have in play.
(This is not in the supply)

CLARIFICATION: You don't get the actions from the Villagers you spend to gain a Gunpowder Plot.
Asper already pointed out with a similar card that having to play a Ruined Library several times is a pretty harsh cost. The megaturn Night card is interesting but too narrow for my taste. If you time it badly you destroy your entire deck.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 20, 2018, 06:00:34 pm
The megaturn Night card is interesting but too narrow for my taste. If you time it badly you destroy your entire deck.

That's what happens when you play with Bombs.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on November 20, 2018, 07:08:50 pm
(https://i.imgur.com/wLOA7Un.png) (https://i.imgur.com/lKzxdrv.png)

Here's my entry: Treaty and Domain.  Treaty is a terminal, one-card trasher that especially loves trashing Estates in the early game, and then later, you can win a Domain from your Treaty.  Domain is 5 VP all together, though just 3 VP if you trash it later, which you probably will.  Trashing a Domain with Treaty gains you a Silver and a Gold to hand, yeeha--hopefully you still have some Coppers left to win that next Domain.  This makes for a fun minigame to try and churn through the Domains, though you'll need some extra help to keep lining up your Treaties with trash targets and the needed treasures to activate.  There are eight Domains in a two-player game, otherwise there are twelve.

*Edit: Adjusted Treaty's price from $3 to $4.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 20, 2018, 07:54:57 pm
Allies are a sideways card type. They go in your sideways deck, and start in the supply. When you buy an Ally, it goes in front of you, like an Artifact, and you benefit from it while it痴 in front of you. Another player can buy an Ally from in front of you, and then they put it in front of them. There is only one copy of each Ally.
Quote
Painter (Ally, cost $5)
At the start of your turn, you may reveal a Painting from your hand. If you did, gain a Gold. If you didn't, gain a Painting from the Painting pile.

Quote
Painting (Action, cost $0*
+1 Card
+1 Action
If you have an odd number of Paintings in play, + $1
*(This is not in the supply)
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 21, 2018, 03:14:10 am
(https://i.imgur.com/zMtaiA6.png) (https://i.imgur.com/lKzxdrv.png)

Here's my entry: Treaty and Domain.  Treaty is a terminal, one-card trasher that especially loves trashing Estates in the early game, and then later, you can win a Domain from your Treaty.  Domain is 5 VP all together, though just 3 VP if you trash it later, which you probably will.  Trashing a Domain with Treaty gains you a Silver and a Gold to hand, yeeha--hopefully you still have some Coppers left to win that next Domain.  This makes for a fun minigame to try and churn through the Domains, though you'll need some extra help to keep lining up your Treaties with trash targets and the needed treasures to activate.  There are eight Domains in a two-player game, otherwise there are twelve.

It壮 a cute mini-game, but I don奏 like the pricing.

At the beginning, it壮 better than Salvager, because +Silver is better than +buy.
When triggered, it gives at least +3VP, even 5 VP in the endgame.
If it trashes a Domain, it means gain a silver, gain a gold, +5$.

That being said, I think it should be a 5$ card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 21, 2018, 03:16:20 am

I removed Bride/Child from the contest, it was simply unbalancable. Here壮 a new try ...

I宋e heard complaints about Peasant being too easy to play, and a boring must-buy? Let壮 change this:

Here come the one-shot-tokens.



Visionary, Action, 6$

Gain a Vision.


Vision, Action, 0*
Put this on your Tavern mat.

At the start of your turn, you may call this to move your  +card, +action, +$ or +buy token to an Action supply pile you have no tokens on.
When you discard this from play, remove all tokens.

(This is not in the supply).


**********************
Visionary is weaker than Teacher, but more accessible. It壮 sometimes skippable, and it壮 tricky to manage a constant flux of visions. Alternatively, you can call them all at once for little megaturns, which is quite fulfilling (if it works).

Also, I like that true Visionaries don奏 care much about what Teachers said ...



Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 21, 2018, 04:26:38 am

I removed Bride/Child from the contest, it was simply unbalancable. Here壮 a new try ...

I宋e heard complaints about Peasant being too easy to play, and a boring must-buy? Let壮 change this:

Here come the one-shot-tokens.



Visionary, Action, 6$

Gain a Vision.


Vision, Action, 0*
Put this on your Tavern mat.

At the start of your turn, you may call this to move your  +card, +action, +$ or +buy token to an Action supply pile you have no tokens on.
When you discard this from play, remove all tokens.

(This is not in the supply).


**********************
Visionary is weaker than Teacher, but more accessible. It壮 sometimes skippable, and it壮 tricky to manage a constant flux of visions. Alternatively, you can call them all at once for little megaturns, which is quite fulfilling (if it works).

Also, I like that true Visionaries don奏 care much about what Teachers said ...
I like this, but "remove all tokens" should probably be rephrased, since literal interpretation would force you to clear out Coffers and Villagers as well as all VP tokens - and not only yours mind you, all of them. It should probably be "Remove all of your tokens from supply piles." This limits the amount of strange interactions to Ferry and Plan.

My only other issue is that this card idea could probably be implemented without using a pile of non-supply cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 21, 2018, 05:10:30 am
It壮 a cute mini-game, but I don奏 like the pricing.

At the beginning, it壮 better than Salvager, because +Silver is better than +buy.
When triggered, it gives at least +3VP, even 5 VP in the endgame.
If it trashes a Domain, it means gain a silver, gain a gold, +5$.

That being said, I think it should be a 5$ card.
I disagree, as a standalone card Treaty is less flexible and weaker than Salvager.
Also note that with all those stop cards in your deck it is harder to create the necessary matches.


I removed Bride/Child from the contest, it was simply unbalancable. Here壮 a new try ...

I宋e heard complaints about Peasant being too easy to play, and a boring must-buy? Let壮 change this:

Here come the one-shot-tokens.



Visionary, Action, 6$

Gain a Vision.


Vision, Action, 0*
Put this on your Tavern mat.

At the start of your turn, you may call this to move your  +card, +action, +$ or +buy token to an Action supply pile you have no tokens on.
When you discard this from play, remove all tokens.

(This is not in the supply).


**********************
Visionary is weaker than Teacher, but more accessible. It壮 sometimes skippable, and it壮 tricky to manage a constant flux of visions. Alternatively, you can call them all at once for little megaturns, which is quite fulfilling (if it works).

Also, I like that true Visionaries don奏 care much about what Teachers said ...
That's a cool idea. I have a hard time to judge the balance of this but my hunch is that this too weak so I'd also test Visionary at $5.
Just some technical triviality, Visionary should say "Gain a Vision from its pile."
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: grep on November 21, 2018, 11:05:20 am
(https://image.ibb.co/i6roxA/m1.png) (https://image.ibb.co/mc0FcA/m2.png)

Manager works as a super-smithy until supply lasts, or acts as a single shot KC if you don't mind gaining a marginally useful card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 21, 2018, 01:21:47 pm
I guess Manager needs a gainer or cheap cantrips to kill off in order to work well. Then Intern is also moderately OKish, with plenty of Actions you often do choose the "Peddler" option of Pawn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: 4est on November 21, 2018, 06:12:50 pm

It‘s a cute mini-game, but I don‘t like the pricing.

At the beginning, it‘s better than Salvager, because +Silver is better than +buy.
When triggered, it gives at least +3VP, even 5 VP in the endgame.
If it trashes a Domain, it means „gain a silver, gain a gold, +5$“.

That being said, I think it should be a 5$ card.

I can definitely see the argument for $5: many official cards that gain Silver to hand cost $5, such as Mine, Explorer, Trading Post, or Sculptor (though each of these also provide additional benefits as well). However Treaty's restrictions for activating (the Silver gain, or the Domain gain) are pretty big ones, and I think it would make it way slower if it cost $5 since you couldn't open it most of the time.

The Salvager comparison is apt; Treaty is better at trashing Estates and Domains but it's worse at trashing literally anything else. That said, Treaty probably could probably cost $4 without changing the card that much, I agree that $3 is maybe too cheap. I'll see about updating the price later today or tomorrow.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 22, 2018, 03:36:37 am
CHALLENGE #7 - NON-SUPPLY CARD SUBMISSION

(https://i.imgur.com/CT7UE9K.jpg)    (https://i.imgur.com/6fAWWPf.jpg)

Expanded Instructions:
Excavation - You must choose one of the options three times. It can be any combination of choices and does not have to be the same choice each time.

Refinery - Set aside Treasures come from the Supply and are returned there at the end of the current turn. If the Treasure Supply pile is empty you cannot set aside a card from there and thus cannot get the extra $1 when you play copies of it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: terminalCopper on November 22, 2018, 04:44:30 am
Thanks @Holunder9 and @faust, I agree with your suggestions for Rewording.

I don奏 think Visionary is too weak in terms of "too weak to be bought on a frequent basis". I believe that Visionary is strong on every board with a spammable card which lacks one of the engine components "draw, +actions, +buy". These aren't rare.

On the other hand, this mediocre strength wastes the best part of the card: playing with multiple visions, and managing interesting decisions when to call it and where to put the tokens. This will happen much more often if players get multiple Visionaries, and fight for the Vision split. It's a very interesting situation, if one player has a strong deck with 4 Visions (enabling two tokens per turn), and the other has a weaker deck, but 6 visions.

With this situation in mind, I agree with Holunder9 that it's better game design to buff Visionary, maybe even by a lot. I think I will test to reduce cost to 5$, with +2$ on top. I am pretty confident this won't lead to boring games, because Visions need interactions; also Visionaries become lousy terminal Silvers once the Visions are gone, which is an additional motivation to buy other cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 22, 2018, 07:25:26 am
CHALLENGE #7 - NON-SUPPLY CARD SUBMISSION

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2vmwyeo.jpg)    (http://i65.tinypic.com/2zemjns.jpg)
I don't think that I am a big fan of Excavation but Refinery looks very interesting, a Copper(Silver/Gold)smith variant that actually works.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 22, 2018, 10:19:08 am
To me, the basic idea of Excavation seems interesting: You have to decide whether to harm your current hand or gamble on trashing something random. The main problem, I guess, is how strong trashing 3 cards is. Most of the time trashing 3 cards from your hand is so strong you won't care what you're missing out on, but then trashing 3 known junk cards from the top of your deck is possibly brokenly strong. It also seems like the best option will nearly always be to forget the Refineries and just trash as much as possible.

Refinery, on its own, also seems interesting: You have to decide whether to pile up a bunch of cheap treasures or try to get a lot of expensive ones. I feel the interaction between the two cards is weak, though.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 22, 2018, 12:25:34 pm
Quote from: Kudasai link=topic=18987.msg777990#msg777990
date=1542875797
CHALLENGE #7 - NON-SUPPLY CARD SUBMISSION

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2vmwyeo.jpg)    (http://i65.tinypic.com/2zemjns.jpg)
Refinery should be a Duration card.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on November 22, 2018, 01:08:49 pm
CHALLENGE #7 - NON-SUPPLY CARD SUBMISSION

(http://i68.tinypic.com/2vmwyeo.jpg)    (http://i65.tinypic.com/2zemjns.jpg)

Neither of your cards are showing up for me.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 22, 2018, 02:54:49 pm
Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 22, 2018, 02:57:52 pm
Neither of your cards are showing up for me.

Hmm, Imgur was giving me issues last night so I used another wacky hosting site. Are they showing up now?

Also, thanks for everyone else's comments. I will unfortunately have to wait to respond to them until the end of the day!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrFrog on November 22, 2018, 03:00:44 pm
Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gubump on November 22, 2018, 03:10:11 pm
Neither of your cards are showing up for me.

Hmm, Imgur was giving me issues last night so I used another wacky hosting site. Are they showing up now?

Also, thanks for everyone else's comments. I will unfortunately have to wait to respond to them until the end of the day!

Now Excavation is showing up twice, and Refinery still isn't showing at all.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 22, 2018, 03:12:54 pm
Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
True that but one combination making this stay in play doesn't justify making it a Duration. Capitalism already creates confusion so you can deal with some extra confusion in games with Capitalism and Excavation. But in all other Kingdoms players will just stare on Refinery and wonder why it is a Duration.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: faust on November 22, 2018, 03:51:08 pm
Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
True that but one combination making this stay in play doesn't justify making it a Duration. Capitalism already creates confusion so you can deal with some extra confusion in games with Capitalism and Excavation. But in all other Kingdoms players will just stare on Refinery and wonder why it is a Duration.
It is still a Duration because it has an effect that does not take place when you play it.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 22, 2018, 04:08:55 pm
Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
True that but one combination making this stay in play doesn't justify making it a Duration. Capitalism already creates confusion so you can deal with some extra confusion in games with Capitalism and Excavation. But in all other Kingdoms players will just stare on Refinery and wonder why it is a Duration.
It is still a Duration because it has an effect that does not take place when you play it.

So do Bridge, Priest, Scheme, and Merchant and those aren't durations.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 22, 2018, 04:18:19 pm
So do Bridge, Priest, Scheme, and Merchant and those aren't durations.
I think the "issue" (well, one combo isn't really an issue) is that these will all be discarded if Capitalism is active whereas Refinery will not as it references a precise point in time.

Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
True that but one combination making this stay in play doesn't justify making it a Duration. Capitalism already creates confusion so you can deal with some extra confusion in games with Capitalism and Excavation. But in all other Kingdoms players will just stare on Refinery and wonder why it is a Duration.
It is still a Duration because it has an effect that does not take place when you play it.
Technically that's totally right. But giving that fellow a touch of orange for the sake of one combo and at the cost of utter confusion in all other Kingdoms is not something you want to do.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: MrHiTech on November 22, 2018, 05:30:38 pm
So do Bridge, Priest, Scheme, and Merchant and those aren't durations.
I think the "issue" (well, one combo isn't really an issue) is that these will all be discarded if Capitalism is active whereas Refinery will not as it references a precise point in time.

Refinery should be a Duration card.
ABC, Buy phase comes after the Action phase.

Capitalism...
True that but one combination making this stay in play doesn't justify making it a Duration. Capitalism already creates confusion so you can deal with some extra confusion in games with Capitalism and Excavation. But in all other Kingdoms players will just stare on Refinery and wonder why it is a Duration.
It is still a Duration because it has an effect that does not take place when you play it.
Technically that's totally right. But giving that fellow a touch of orange for the sake of one combo and at the cost of utter confusion in all other Kingdoms is not something you want to do.
You're right. I misinterpreted "your next buy phase" as "the buy phase of your next turn".maybe "this turn's buy phase" would be better
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 22, 2018, 09:45:05 pm
Just realized it's almost been a week, better pull my ideas together.
(https://i.imgur.com/OoiuZsX.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/6jQ8H0R.jpg?1)
It's a bit thematic. I hope it doesn't look like something I slapped together at the last minute (which it is :P).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 22, 2018, 10:54:56 pm
I ended up rewording Refinery. It should play cleaner now and interact better with Capitalism. The only big difference in play is now you need to decide what Treasure to add the +$1 to before actually knowing how your hand will turn out. Mostly this won't matter as you'll likely just choose the most common Treasure in your deck, but it could create some interesting choices for players.

To me, the basic idea of Excavation seems interesting: You have to decide whether to harm your current hand or gamble on trashing something random. The main problem, I guess, is how strong trashing 3 cards is. Most of the time trashing 3 cards from your hand is so strong you won't care what you're missing out on, but then trashing 3 known junk cards from the top of your deck is possibly brokenly strong. It also seems like the best option will nearly always be to forget the Refineries and just trash as much as possible.

Refinery, on its own, also seems interesting: You have to decide whether to pile up a bunch of cheap treasures or try to get a lot of expensive ones. I feel the interaction between the two cards is weak, though.

I agree with most of what you've said. Excavation is strong enough on it's own to justify the $6 price without ever getting a Refinery. But Refinery is so good that I think players who actively build to get a few will fare much better as the time to get your economy back up is drastically cut. And that is really the connection between the two cards that I was going for.

If the whole thing proves too strong I'll make Excavation trash 3 cards no matter what. This will make it far less playable late game and likely make it so a player has to trash more Coppers in order to get Refineries. That decision will be for another day though.

Thanks everyone for the comments and Happy Thanksgiving (even for ya'll outside the U.S. that don't celebrate it)!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 23, 2018, 01:20:17 am
Just realized it's almost been a week, better pull my ideas together.
(https://i.imgur.com/OoiuZsX.jpg?1) (https://i.imgur.com/6jQ8H0R.jpg?1)
It's a bit thematic. I hope it doesn't look like something I slapped together at the last minute (which it is :P).

Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 23, 2018, 03:53:01 am
(https://i.imgur.com/yTsJCK8.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/dCWAI4C.jpg)

Redevelop may be a bit too hard to get.

Redevelop is quite good and should be hard to get. I think what you have now is great. Mass Silver gaining is not likely the best way to get to Redevelop, but even if a player chooses this route, they can turn those Silvers into $5 cost cards. So you have a solid baseline strategy, but with many other options (including stuff you can do with Architect).

I do worry the cost of $6* is too good if you got 2 Redevelops.

Great submission!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: spiralstaircase on November 23, 2018, 05:42:28 am
Asper already pointed out with a similar card that having to play a Ruined Library several times is a pretty harsh cost.

Good point.  I'd nerfed Plotter a bit from my original idea, because I was concerned that it made it too easy to gain Gunpower Plot, but I've now reverted to the slightly more powerful version, which gives you one Villager per Plotter in play.  Now, you could play it as two Ruined Libraries and a cantrip, or as three cantrips and a Vilage, and have enough spare to get one (if you want one).

Quote
The megaturn Night card is interesting but too narrow for my taste. If you time it badly you destroy your entire deck.

Time it well, then :-)

The idea is that with the villagers you get from Plotter, you should be able to set up a megaturn even on boards where the other cards are all terminal.  And then, you get your megaturn again!
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Seprix on November 23, 2018, 10:29:11 am
Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.

Huh? It's not political at all, comparatively speaking? Once you discard to three, you get to just choose the discard option again forever, it'll never hurt more again. It's possibly still annoying because you can freely get Villager tokens which are insanely better than getting +2 Actions, but I wouldn't call this political?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: King Leon on November 23, 2018, 02:08:02 pm
Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.

Huh? It's not political at all, comparatively speaking? Once you discard to three, you get to just choose the discard option again forever, it'll never hurt more again. It's possibly still annoying because you can freely get Villager tokens which are insanely better than getting +2 Actions, but I wouldn't call this political?

The card says Гhoose one, not Еach other player ... their choice.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 23, 2018, 02:30:44 pm
Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.

Huh? It's not political at all, comparatively speaking? Once you discard to three, you get to just choose the discard option again forever, it'll never hurt more again. It's possibly still annoying because you can freely get Villager tokens which are insanely better than getting +2 Actions, but I wouldn't call this political?

The card says Гhoose one, not Еach other player ... their choice.
And? Suppose you have just one Action left and Miltia and Witch in your hand. Also suppose that Alice is already down to three cards (because Bob played a Miltia on his turn) whereas Bob has 5 cards.
So your claim that Gallows is political is identical to the claim that such a choice that could occur in Base Dominion is political. This might actually be true, depending on how narrow you define "political" when it comes to games. But given that the base game enables such an option and given DXV's total hatred for political games I think it is fair to claim that this is a very mild form of political. Also note that in a 3P game, constant Militia plays always hurt just one player (because the third fellow got already Militia-ed in the previous turn).

You could imagine something similar: only one Curse is left, Alice has a Lighthouse out whereas Bob has not so playing Witch would be political. Yuu could have a Smithy in hand but decide that cursing Bob matters more than drawing an extra card. Is this a political choice? Technically, yes totally.
But it doesn't convert the game in something like Star Realms where you can always choose whom to hurt. So I'd rather view it as ordinary player interaction. Don't got enough Ligthouses? Your mistake.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 23, 2018, 02:37:21 pm
Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.

Huh? It's not political at all, comparatively speaking? Once you discard to three, you get to just choose the discard option again forever, it'll never hurt more again. It's possibly still annoying because you can freely get Villager tokens which are insanely better than getting +2 Actions, but I wouldn't call this political?

The card says Гhoose one, not Еach other player ... their choice.
And? Suppose you have just one Action left and Miltia and Witch in your hand. Also suppose that Alice is already down to three cards (because Bob played a Miltia on his turn) whereas Bob has 5 cards.
So your claim that Gallows is political is identical to the claim that such a choice that could occur in Base Dominion is political. This might actually be true, depending on how narrow you define "political" when it comes to games. But given that the base game enables such an option and given DXV's total hatred for political games I think it is fair to claim that this is a very mild form of political. Also note that in a 3P game, constant Militia plays always hurt just one player (because the third fellow got already Militia-ed in the previous turn).

You could imagine something similar: only one Curse is left, Alice has a Lighthouse out whereas Bob has not so playing Witch would be political. Yuu could have a Smithy in hand but decide that cursing Bob matters more than drawing an extra card. Is this a political choice? Technically, yes totally.
But it doesn't convert the game in something like Star Realms where you can always choose whom to hurt. So I'd rather view it as ordinary player interaction. Don't got enough Ligthouses? Your mistake.
Yeah, I don't think it's political, at least no more than any other attack cards.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Seprix on November 23, 2018, 02:38:03 pm
Gallows has the problem, that it has a non-stacking and a stacking attack. This is very political in multiplayer games, because nobody wants to be the first person to choose the discard option.

Huh? It's not political at all, comparatively speaking? Once you discard to three, you get to just choose the discard option again forever, it'll never hurt more again. It's possibly still annoying because you can freely get Villager tokens which are insanely better than getting +2 Actions, but I wouldn't call this political?

The card says „Choose one“, not „Each other player ... their choice“.

okay I misread, don't see the politics really still but wow is that attack busted, you get to stack up villager tokens and also curse and discard potentially at whim? JEEZ. That is going to be a "the rich get richer" card, first guy to get it knocks down everyone else with discard attacks and cursing, and also gets infinite tokens. Discarding with Executioner is even optional. Man.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 23, 2018, 02:43:03 pm
This isn't Followers, the Attack is a Miltia OR Witch and the vanilla stuff is Woodcutter OR 2 Villagers.

The flexibility is nice but this isn't really more crazy than Goons and above all the cost to get it is pretty high: set up Village, Gallows, Gallows, then discard your entire hand which is equivalent to, in the absence of virtual Coins or Alms, losing an entire turn.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Fly-Eagles-Fly on November 23, 2018, 02:47:27 pm
Yeah, tbh the thing I most dislike about it is that if someone makes you discard down to three cards, then it's even harder to get Gallows. Maybe the Villagers are too good, but like Holunder said the opportunity cost is very high, high enough in my opinion.
When's the judging?
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on November 23, 2018, 02:50:30 pm
I'm a bit ill today so I'll do the judging tomorrow when I'll hopefully be better.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 23, 2018, 02:51:26 pm
Yeah, tbh the thing I most dislike about it is that if someone makes you discard down to three cards, then it's even harder to get Gallows. Maybe the Villagers are too good, but like Holunder said the opportunity cost is very high, high enough in my opinion.
When's the judging?
The only thing I'd slightly worry about is combining Villagers with an Attack. Non-terminal Attacks have become more frequent in recent years (Relic, Werewolf, Idol) but it is nonetheless something that should be handled carefully.
On the other hand it is a non-Supply card and far less crazy than Followers or Mercenary.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 23, 2018, 10:51:04 pm
Yeah, tbh the thing I most dislike about it is that if someone makes you discard down to three cards, then it's even harder to get Gallows. Maybe the Villagers are too good, but like Holunder said the opportunity cost is very high, high enough in my opinion.
When's the judging?

You only need to discard 8 to get the Gold, not Gallows.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Tejayes on November 23, 2018, 11:59:05 pm
If there is still time (and even if there isn't), here's my last-minute entry and possible addition to Yuletide:

(https://i.imgur.com/zTCfc5Vl.png) (https://i.imgur.com/Y5AnCb3l.png)

Quote
Spoiled Brat
Action/Attack - $5
-
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Action, and discards the rest. You may gain a card from the Trash. If you do, gain a Coal onto your deck.

Quote
Coal
Treasure - $0*
-
$1
When you play this, you may return it to the Coal pile if you have at least 3 Actions in play.
(This is not in the Supply.)

So, the Spoiled Brat demands a lot of attention from others, and can often get it. However, a certain person knows this kid has been naughty, and thus will leave an undesired lump in their stocking.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Holunder9 on November 24, 2018, 03:31:39 am
Yeah, tbh the thing I most dislike about it is that if someone makes you discard down to three cards, then it's even harder to get Gallows. Maybe the Villagers are too good, but like Holunder said the opportunity cost is very high, high enough in my opinion.
When's the judging?

You only need to discard 8 to get the Gold, not Gallows.
Yep, you "only" have to, most likely, waste an entire turn to get an Attack card which would be a $5 or $6 if it were a Kingdom card. That is as impressive as a card that says: "You may discard your hand to gain a card costing up to $6."

If another Curser is in the Kingdom my hunch is that in most cases you prefer getting that Curser before Gallows.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Commodore Chuckles on November 24, 2018, 09:34:30 am
Yeah, tbh the thing I most dislike about it is that if someone makes you discard down to three cards, then it's even harder to get Gallows. Maybe the Villagers are too good, but like Holunder said the opportunity cost is very high, high enough in my opinion.
When's the judging?

You only need to discard 8 to get the Gold, not Gallows.
Yep, you "only" have to, most likely, waste an entire turn to get an Attack card which would be a $5 or $6 if it were a Kingdom card. That is as impressive as a card that says: "You may discard your hand to gain a card costing up to $6."

If another Curser is in the Kingdom my hunch is that in most cases you prefer getting that Curser before Gallows.

I was responding to his first sentence. He said that if you have to discard down to 3 it's harder to get Gallows, which is incorrect.
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Gazbag on November 24, 2018, 07:49:36 pm
I don't feel at all qualified to make a sound judgement here.

Avenue/Flower Seller: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777615#msg777615) Oops I probably should have asked for people to say how many of the card there is, ah well. So my worry here is that with only 8/12 Flower Sellers available and Avenue giving 3 Flower Sellers at a time it seems pretty easy to hoard Flower Sellers, kind of like what you can do with Experiment sometimes. Adding more Flower Sellers just makes too many points available. I think the concept is great but maybe Avenue needs to be changed to make it work well.

Courier/Message: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777619#msg777619) This one is nice and simple, I really like Message although I wonder whether a terminal Silver is the best thing to have paired with it. I guess it's a tiny bit like Flag Bearer where you're buying this terminal Silver for some temporary draw.

Demagogue/Assasin: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777630#msg777630) This one is hard to evaluate for me, I appreciate that Demagogue isn't a great early game card so it isn't an auto-open. One thing that I find is worrying is that the Assassinator doesn't get their card back if the assassination fails so it's quite swingy, I wonder if it would be more fun if they got the card back if the Assassin whiffs but not if it hits? I'm also not sure this is great with 3+ players, it seems frustrating to have your Demagogue trashed by an opponent's Assassin that came from your other opponent's Demagogue. The flavour is great though.

Day Worker/Night Worker: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777644#msg777644) I think Day Worker is a cool workshop variant and Night Worker is a clever way of getting actions into play for Day Worker although it is kind of similar to Ghost, although I praised Message which is basically Lab so I guess I can't criticise that. I wonder whether Night Worker needs to be gained to hand, although I guess it costs $5 so it probably does.

Architect/Redevelop: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777657#msg777657) I like Architect, I guess if you just put +2 Cards on a base set card I'll probably like it... but I like how it can gain Silvers and also draws so the condition to get Redevelop makes sense. Redevelop is scary but it's quite hard to get so I guess it has to be, it also seems like the fun kind of scary to me.

Ox/Yoke of Oxen: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777671#msg777671) I love the concept of a card that you can combine like this. Terminal +1 Card is generally frowned upon though and I think the card might be good enough without any +cards. It's not like Woodcutter for $4 is the worst thing ever and combining them seems like quite the upside.

Archaeologist/Excavation Piece: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777695#msg777695) I like this apart from the weird scoring on Excavation Piece, I don't see why it can't just give a flat vp value. I'm not sure Excavation Piece needs to be a Treasure either really.

Factory/Worker: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777724#msg777724) I like this one too, Bank was getting lonely as a building that's secretly a treasure. I like how the workers give your opponents some interesting decisions to make but they seem like a pretty hefty disadvantage so I wonder how often this is worth going for.

Oak/Acorn: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777734#msg777734) This has some great flavour with the on-trash and the acorns growing more trees. It does seem really strong for $4 though. I think it really should cost $5, the Acorns gaining more Oaks I think is what pushes this over what a $4 should be allowed to do. It's such a delightful design though, I really love it!

Sail Boat/Passenger: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777793#msg777793) I like this one a lot too, nice and clean design and seems like it opens up some interesting decisions, looks well balanced at first glance to me too. I guess you could say that it's playing it a bit safe, but really I don't see what's not to like.

Consorts/Royal Favour: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777830#msg777830) This seems like a well balanced Throne+ with lots of decision making. The +1 Card on Royal Favour doesn't read too well but I understand why it's there, I'm kind of grasping to find criticisms here though.

Lunatic/Conjurator: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777844#msg777844) Lunatic is pretty much Masquerade. Conjurator is double Necromancer. I don't know, with Lunatic being so similar to Masquerade and Conjurator just being better Necromancer I'm not sure this is doing much new? And Lunatic doesn't entice you to trash other Action cards either so I'm not sure it's the best fit really.

Plotter/Gunpowder Plot: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777845#msg777845) I love the flavour here, although you should have to gather 11 Villagers, not 5. I didn't actually hate the +1 Card +1 Villager as much as others, saying that you have to play a Ruined Library 5 times is kind of not how it worked because Ruined Library doesn't give +1 Villager which can do things other than get you to Gunpowder Plot if you need it too. But this new version seems kind of bonkers for $3? Villagers are really powerful!

Superstitious Witch/Witch Bottle: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777860#msg777860) This is cute, but I imagine it has a similar thing to Chariot Race but maybe even worse. You know, your opponent draws a Witch Bottle at the right moment and blocks all of your Curses and you don't and oops now I have 3 Curses which make it even harder to draw a Witch Bottle and then things spiral down from there and you're left questioning why you ever played this game. Just a personal bias of mine.

Treaty/Domain: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777890#msg777890) I really like Treaty actually, a very nice little trasher to open with. Domain is maybe a bit too generous? I do like that it entices you to trash it to tie it back to Treaty though.

Painter/Painting: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777891#msg777891) I'm not sure about this Ally thing, I did ask for a card not a card-shaped-thing. So it doesn't really fit what I was looking for, sorry.

Visionary/Vision: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777903#msg777903) My gripe with this is that Visionary is kind of a non-card, like I'm not sure I can justify putting this ahead of the designs that have 2 interesting cards.

Manager/Intern: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777926#msg777926)  I don't understand why this has a Debt cost +3 Cards +$3 seems like something that you'd open with every time to me. I like the idea of the card apart from that though.

Excavation/Refinery: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777990#msg777990) I'm not sure why people are saying Excavation is strong, it seems kind of weak for a $6 to me. Well ignoring the Refinery part at least. I'm not a fan of the blind trashing part of Excavation, given your deck will probably be fairly built up by the time you can afford a $6 it seems like it'll backfire very often and Lookout is very unpopular for its semi-blind trashing so I think it's best to not do that kind of thing. The setting aside part of Refinery is unfortunate, thanks Capitalism.

Executioner/Gallows: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg778056#msg778056) I think this falls into the pitfall of doing too much at once. It can provide draw, Gold gaining, +Buy, +Villagers, Militia attack and Cursing all in one! The only thing it's really missing is trashing. Discarding your hand is a big cost of course, but it's not so bad early on given that Gallows is probably better than anything you could buy anyway and later on you might be able to start doing things with +$ giving Actions (like Gallows) where discarding your hand isn't so much of a big deal.

Spoiled Brat/Coal: (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg778117#msg778117) I think it's on-record that I'm not a big fan of Knights at all? Sorry I know it's just my own personal bias but this is just not for me. I think posting cards that you think appeal specifically to the judge is an underrated aspect of this contest's metagame honestly.


It was really tough to decide a winner, I was torn between quite a few and it was painful to whittle down my list of top contenders.

The winner is Architect/Redevelop (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777657#msg777657) by Aquila. With Consorts/Royal Favour (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777830#msg777830) and Sail Boat/Passenger (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg777793#msg777793) as the runners up (and a lot of others very close, you probably know who you are based on my comments).
Title: Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
Post by: Kudasai on November 25, 2018, 12:36:25 am
Well this is a bit frustrating. My final submission for Excavation was a cost of $5, not $6. Also, the price is a reflection of Excavation's power, Refineries power and how hard it is to get Refinery. You seem to have attributed the cost merely to Excavation. No one would say Urchin is a poor