Dominion Strategy Forum
Dominion => Dominion General Discussion => Topic started by: xitoliv on July 31, 2019, 04:16:40 pm
-
from the RGG Instagram/Twitter account.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B0l_YXPAMrt/?igshid=109hc2jjmbkup
https://twitter.com/riograndegames/status/1156654389802786817
One named Church.
One named Captain.
No details yet on card effects.
Both durations.
-
Also you'll be able to play them online tomorrow (at dominion.games).
-
Will they be available outside GenCon eventually?
-
I'd be amazed if they weren't.
All previous Dominion promos ended up being stocked on the bgg store eventually.
-
Will they be available outside GenCon eventually?
English copies will be available at BGG. For other languages, it's up to those publishers as to if/how they make the cards available.
-
Is it OK to post what the cards are here? I think they seem interesting additions, but don't want to go against any protocol / ruin anyone's surprise.
-
Please do! I'm not going to have time to play for the next few days but I'd like to see what they are.
-
OK!
Church
Action - Duration - $3
+1 Action
Set aside up to 3 cards from your hand face down. At the start of your next turn, put them into your hand, then you may trash a card from your hand.
Captain
Action - Duration - $6
Now and at the start of your next turn: Play a non-Duration Action card from the Supply costing up to $4, leaving it there.
-
So can we talk about them?
I'll use spoiler tags too for now...
How does captain interact with 'played' cards like Conspirator? Does the card you play count as a 'played' card for it?
Next question: Does it have the be the same card played both times (now and start)?
-
So can we talk about them?
I'll use spoiler tags too for now...
How does captain interact with 'played' cards like Conspirator? Does the card you play count as a 'played' card for it?
Next question: Does it have the be the same card played both times (now and start)?
You know, what? I've decided to just go ahead and remove the spoiler tags - they're live online, so anyone can go see them there, and well, the name of the thread pretty much implies they're going to be talked about here.
That said, the answers to your questions (based on how other similar cards act) are:
1. Yes
2. No
-
(Summary of Discord discussion below. If I understand correctly, the interaction was originally described by Seprix during Playtesting)
In the presence of ferry, band of misfits and any other cost reducer, Captain enables the following infinite loop:
(1) Buy ferry on Captain
(2) Play cost reducer
(3)
(a) Play Captain as Band of Misfits
(b) Play Band of Misfits as Captain
(c) Goto a
While this does not do anything on the turn it is played, it allows you to play an arbitrary number of cards costing up to 4, at the beginning of next turn.
-
(1. Yes / 2. No)
In the presence of ferry, band of misfits and any other cost reducer, Captain enables the following infinite loop:
This will probably go away when I fix Band of Misfits (though I won't know for sure until that day comes, when we work on the Dark Ages layout).
-
First game with captain: it's hella good when death cart is around..
-
shameless plug
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oic_O0FWNzg
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
on the surface, yes!
although there is different wording to watch out for between Band of Misfits / Overlord / Captain (which appear to be mostly stronger for the Captain... for example Overlord pretending to be sir martin will result in a trashed overlord if it hits another knight... but captain I believe will stay in your deck)
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
Out of the couple games I've played today, it is way, way better than BoM
-
The fact that you get something at the start of your next turn is what makes it way better than BoM. It can be used to give you extra actions/cards/trashes/etc., and the fact that you get to pick what you want to play after seeing your next hand is amazing.
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
on the surface, yes!
although there is different wording to watch out for between Band of Misfits / Overlord / Captain (which appear to be mostly stronger for the Captain... for example Overlord pretending to be sir martin will result in a trashed overlord if it hits another knight... but captain I believe will stay in your deck)
I think it is more comparable to Necromancer on supply.
-
Wow, church sounds wacky 8)
-
In the presence of ferry, band of misfits and any other cost reducer, Captain enables the following infinite loop:
This will probably go away when I fix Band of Misfits (though I won't know for sure until that day comes, when we work on the Dark Ages layout).
Is Captain intended to be sort of a test drive for a fixed Band of Misfits?
-
Just tried out a few games with Captain (and one with Church).
The first game was with Church and it was cool. nothing especially new or crazy about it.
Captain easily gets crazy, and I got it with crazy combos on the board like Throne Room and Canal.
(We happened to get two games with Canal)
Fun moments:
- We didn't get a board with Death Cart, but we did get Pillage + Canal.
- The last board was particularly crazy with Canal, Villain, Recruiter, Market, Throne Room, Smithy, Encampment, etc... We needed more Provinces for a game like that.
Notable moments:
- realizing that Captain doesn't really work with Highway and Groundkeeper ('while this is in play' on a card that doesn't get put in play). (That was the first game with Canal.)
- Captain is still worthwhile when the only cards costing $4 or less are Worker's Village, Page, and Poor House. (yes, there was trashing on the board so Poor House could be good.)
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
Wrong...
"Leaving it there" means that when you play the card from the supply costing (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) or less, you leave that card in the supply; it never moves to your in-play area. So Village is in the supply.. you play Village, but you don't move it. Captain is in-play like normal, and gets cleaned up like normal.
The same wording is used on Necromancer (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Necromancer).
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
on the surface, yes!
although there is different wording to watch out for between Band of Misfits / Overlord / Captain (which appear to be mostly stronger for the Captain... for example Overlord pretending to be sir martin will result in a trashed overlord if it hits another knight... but captain I believe will stay in your deck)
I think it is more comparable to Necromancer on supply.
Necromancer was already BoM for the trash pile though...
-
So is Captain more or less simply Band of Misfits that works both now and next turn, for a cost of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6f/Coin6.png/16px-Coin6.png) instead of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/7/7d/Coin5.png/16px-Coin5.png)? That sounds way way better than BoM.
on the surface, yes!
although there is different wording to watch out for between Band of Misfits / Overlord / Captain (which appear to be mostly stronger for the Captain... for example Overlord pretending to be sir martin will result in a trashed overlord if it hits another knight... but captain I believe will stay in your deck)
Ah, but only BoM has the ability to gain you Treasure Map Gold. That is one second-rate captain.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
Wrong...
"Leaving it there" means that when you play the card from the supply costing (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) or less, you leave that card in the supply; it never moves to your in-play area. So Village is in the supply.. you play Village, but you don't move it. Captain is in-play like normal, and gets cleaned up like normal.
The same wording is used on Necromancer (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Necromancer).
That's what I said. BoM would potentially get trashed or returned to the Supply wheras the card that Captain copies as well as Captain itself does not. He stands there, constant as the northern star
That's a significant buff over BoM. Another significant buff in the presence of cost reducers is that Captain says $4 instead of cheaper. So it can potentially play $5s.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
Wrong...
"Leaving it there" means that when you play the card from the supply costing (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) or less, you leave that card in the supply; it never moves to your in-play area. So Village is in the supply.. you play Village, but you don't move it. Captain is in-play like normal, and gets cleaned up like normal.
The same wording is used on Necromancer (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Necromancer).
That's what I said. BoM would potentially get trashed or returned to the Supply wheras the card that Captain copies as well as Captain itself does not. He stands there, constant as the northern star
That's a significant buff over BoM. Another significant buff in the presence of cost reducers is that Captain says $4 instead of cheaper. So it can potentially play $5s.
From the way it was worded, it really sounds like you were saying that the Captain is the thing that stays where it is; not the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) card. I mean, the Captain will also not get trashed when you play Feast and "trash this", but that part of it has nothing to do with the "leaving it there" text that was being asked about; that's simply because it plays another card rather than playing itself as another card.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
Wrong...
"Leaving it there" means that when you play the card from the supply costing (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) or less, you leave that card in the supply; it never moves to your in-play area. So Village is in the supply.. you play Village, but you don't move it. Captain is in-play like normal, and gets cleaned up like normal.
The same wording is used on Necromancer (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Necromancer).
That's what I said. BoM would potentially get trashed or returned to the Supply wheras the card that Captain copies as well as Captain itself does not. He stands there, constant as the northern star
That's a significant buff over BoM. Another significant buff in the presence of cost reducers is that Captain says $4 instead of cheaper. So it can potentially play $5s.
From the way it was worded, it really sounds like you were saying that the Captain is the thing that stays where it is; not the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) card. I mean, the Captain will also not get trashed when you play Feast and "trash this", but that part of it has nothing to do with the "leaving it there" text that was being asked about; that's simply because it plays another card rather than playing itself as another card.
I wasn't as precise as you but my claim was correct, i.e. Captain stays where he is. That the card he copies also stays where it is is less relevant, except for piling and covering up (for example if Encampment would get set aside, you could pull off tricks like getting at Plunders) issues.
What you mainly care about is that you kill off your BoM if you play it as Death Cart whereas your Captain survives if you play it as Death Cart. Whether the Death Cart in the Supply that you copied gets trashed or not is of secondary relevance.
-
Captain: I am not sure what the "leaving it there" phrase means. At first I thought it means Cleanup skips the played cards.
It implies that, unlike the wicked BoM, the noble Captain is immortal. BoM as Encampment, Death Cart, etc. would potentially leave your play area while Captain does not.
Wrong...
"Leaving it there" means that when you play the card from the supply costing (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) or less, you leave that card in the supply; it never moves to your in-play area. So Village is in the supply.. you play Village, but you don't move it. Captain is in-play like normal, and gets cleaned up like normal.
The same wording is used on Necromancer (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Necromancer).
That's what I said. BoM would potentially get trashed or returned to the Supply wheras the card that Captain copies as well as Captain itself does not. He stands there, constant as the northern star
That's a significant buff over BoM. Another significant buff in the presence of cost reducers is that Captain says $4 instead of cheaper. So it can potentially play $5s.
From the way it was worded, it really sounds like you were saying that the Captain is the thing that stays where it is; not the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) card. I mean, the Captain will also not get trashed when you play Feast and "trash this", but that part of it has nothing to do with the "leaving it there" text that was being asked about; that's simply because it plays another card rather than playing itself as another card.
I wasn't as precise as you but my claim was correct, i.e. Captain stays where he is. That the card he copies also stays where it is is less relevant, except for piling and covering up (for example if Encampment would get set aside, you could pull off tricks like getting at Plunders) issues.
What you mainly care about is that you kill off your BoM if you play it as Death Cart whereas your Captain survives if you play it as Death Cart. Whether the Death Cart in the Supply that you copied gets trashed or not is of secondary relevance.
The question was "what does 'leaving it there' mean?" though. While it is true that Captain doesn't get trashed when you use it to play a one-shot, that has nothing to do with the question being asked... "Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
Your answer would have been fine if he had instead asked about the differences between how BoM works vs how Captain works.
-
"Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
Nope. If you play Captain as Embargo neither the Embargo nor the Captain will get trashed.
-
If you play Captain as Embargo neither the Embargo nor the Captain will get trashed.
I know that. But the fact that Captain isn't trashed has nothing to do at all with "leaving it there". The "it" in "leaving it there" is specifically the Embargo, not the Captain. Someone asked a question about what "leaving it there" means, and you answered by stating a fact about how Captain works which has nothing to do with "leaving it there".
If Captain didn't say "Leaving it there", then it would still be true that Captain isn't trashed when you use it to play Embargo.
-
If you play Captain as Embargo neither the Embargo nor the Captain will get trashed.
I know that.
Why do you claim the opposite then?
Captain never dies. His mates don't either but for all practical matters that is far less relevant. Whether that Embargo pile empties or not could sometimes matter but that BoM-Embargo are dead whethereas Captain-Embargo is alive matters a lot.
Captain is most similar to BoM so of course it makes sense to always compare it to BoM just like you automatically compare Mountain Village with Village.
-
If you play Captain as Embargo neither the Embargo nor the Captain will get trashed.
I know that.
Why do you claim the opposite then?
I never said anything claiming the opposite...
Captain never dies. His mates don't either but for all practical matters that is far less relevant. Whether that Embargo pile empties or not could sometimes matter but that BoM-Embargo are dead whethereas Captain-Embargo is alive matters a lot.
It's very relevant when answering the question "what does 'leaving it there' mean?" Also, without the "leaving it there" wording, it wouldn't just be different in terms of emptying piles... if you used Captain to play cards that don't trash themselves, then you would be getting extra cards from it because they would move to your play area and then be cleaned up to your discard pile like any other card you played. The fact that the card you play doesn't move from the supply is very important.
Captain is most similar to BoM so of course it makes sense to always compare it to BoM just like you automatically compare Mountain Village with Village.
Were you intending to simply make comments about Captain in general, or were you intending to answer the question asked in the post you quoted originally? Someone asked a specific question about the wording on a card. You quoted that question in your post, so it was reasonable to assume that you were intending to answer that question.
It's like someone asked "what does '+3 cards' mean on Smithy?" And you answer by saying "Smithy is a (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/2/2a/Coin4.png/16px-Coin4.png) card from the base set. It's a terminal, so you need Villages if you want to play other actions after playing Smithy". Everything you said was true, but it has nothing to do with answering the question being asked.
-
If you play Captain as Embargo neither the Embargo nor the Captain will get trashed.
I know that.
Why do you claim the opposite then?
I never said anything claiming the opposite...
"Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
That is simply confusing. You are right that "leaving it there" refers to the mate and not the Captain but folks who are confused about how Captain works precisely could easily misread this and assume that Captain can sometimes gets trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
You basically negate an impossibility. It is like saying that "eating cabbage doesn't stop the apple from flying towards the sky". Not wrong but pretty confusing to those aliens from the mirror universe who don't know how gravity works over here.
Were you intending to simply make comments about Captain in general, or were you intending to answer the question asked in the post you quoted originally? Someone asked a specific question about the wording on a card. You quoted that question in your post, so it was reasonable to assume that you were intending to answer that question.
You focus on mechanical details, I focus on practical implications and comparisons with existing cards. In my opinion both perspectives are useful but you seemingly think otherwise.
-
I wasn't as precise as you but my claim was correct, i.e. Captain stays where he is. That the card he copies also stays where it is is less relevant, except for piling and covering up (for example if Encampment would get set aside, you could pull off tricks like getting at Plunders) issues.
What you mainly care about is that you kill off your BoM if you play it as Death Cart whereas your Captain survives if you play it as Death Cart. Whether the Death Cart in the Supply that you copied gets trashed or not is of secondary relevance.
You are incorrect. The "leaving it there" phrase does not apply to Captain; it applies to the card Captain plays. It says that the card Captain plays does not get moved into play.
It is true that Captain stays where he is, but that's simply because that's what cards do. If nothing says to trash it or return it to a supply pile, then it stays in play. When you use Captain to play Death Cart, nothing says to trash Captain, so nothing happens to Captain.
You are possibly missing that you do not play Captain as the other card (the way you do with BoM). Captain says "Play a non-Duration Action card from the Supply..." It does not say "Play Captain as " the card. Captain does not become the card.
You focus on mechanical details, I focus on practical implications and comparisons with existing cards. In my opinion both perspectives are useful but you seemingly think otherwise.
If you want to compare to existing cards, you should be comparing with Necromancer, not BoM.
-
if you use Captain on an Island, is it instantly gaining the Island from the Supply? or does "leave it there" supercede that and you just dump a card from your hand on your island mat?
-
if you use Captain on an Island, is it instantly gaining the Island from the Supply? or does "leave it there" supercede that and you just dump a card from your hand on your island mat?
Island works like any other one-shot.... "leave it there" prevents the card from moving, so the Island will not move to the Island mat, just like how Embargo will not move to the trash. You will still put a card from your hand onto your Island mat.
Specifically, the Lose Track rule causes this. "Leaving it there" makes it stay in the supply when it is played instead of moving to your play area like normal. And then when it gets to "Put this on to your Island mat", that instruction fails because that instruction expects Island to be in-play, but it isn't.
-
I never said anything claiming the opposite...
"Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
You misunderstood this. You read it as "The instruction is not sufficient to prevent Captain from being trashed..." It was intended as "The instruction is not necessary to prevent Captain from being trashed..."
-
I never said anything claiming the opposite...
"Leaving it there" doesn't stop the Captain from being trashed when you use it to play a one-shot.
You misunderstood this. You read it as "The instruction is not sufficient to prevent Captain from being trashed..." It was intended as "The instruction is not necessary to prevent Captain from being trashed..."
Right. This whole conversation seems to have been grounded on segura thinking that ipofanes was confused about how Captain would interact with one-shots; especially as compared to how BoM interacts with one-shots. But that's simply not what ipofanes was asking, and there was no implication that ipofanes was confused about that. "Leaving it there" has important implications beyond one-shots. It prevents you from getting to keep the card that you play.
-
The official(?) FAQ on the wiki (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Captain) is also confused about this:
The "leaving it there" clause takes priority over effects of the card being played that move it. Thus Reserve cards are not moved to your mat (and hence not gained). Similarly, Acting Troupe and Death Cart are not trashed.
This is wrong. "Leaving it there" means that the played card doesn't move to your play area when played, which has implications for all cards. It does not refer to "effects of the card being played that move it". Without the clause, you would actually "gain" all cards you played, not just Reserve cards.
-
This is wrong. "Leaving it there" means that the played card doesn't move to your play area when played, which has implications for all cards. It does not refer to "effects of the card being played that move it". Without the clause, you would actually "gain" all cards you played, not just Reserve cards.
Do you gain them? I'd imagine it would work like Masquerade. Or is that why the "quotes"?
-
The official(?) FAQ on the wiki (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Captain) is also confused about this:
The "leaving it there" clause takes priority over effects of the card being played that move it. Thus Reserve cards are not moved to your mat (and hence not gained). Similarly, Acting Troupe and Death Cart are not trashed.
This is wrong. "Leaving it there" means that the played card doesn't move to your play area when played, which has implications for all cards. It does not refer to "effects of the card being played that move it". Without the clause, you would actually "gain" all cards you played, not just Reserve cards.
I haven't clicked on the FAQ yet, which isn't official, but you have that right. "Leaving it there" means you play the card without moving it into play, which you would otherwise do; it's the same as on Necromancer. If it didn't say that, you would move the card into play, so it would be yours although you wouldn't have triggered when-gain abilities. Odds are I wouldn't use such a wording, I'd have you gain the card and then play it.
You don't e.g. trash Captain when you play Embargo with it because Captain doesn't say to trash it anywhere; Embargo trashed Embargo, not Captain. There's just nothing telling you to trash Captain. If it feels like there is, it's because Band of Misfits, the hyper-confusing card that Captain is reminiscent of, turns into Embargo and so trashes itself. For the moment! Again when we next print Dark Ages I may change that.
-
So you can play Captain, then play the last workshop in the pile, and that workshop can gain itself since it is still there, right?
-
This is wrong. "Leaving it there" means that the played card doesn't move to your play area when played, which has implications for all cards. It does not refer to "effects of the card being played that move it". Without the clause, you would actually "gain" all cards you played, not just Reserve cards.
Do you gain them? I'd imagine it would work like Masquerade. Or is that why the "quotes"?
That's why the quotes. You would get the cards into your play area and then your discard pile, but you wouldn't ever actually gain them.
-
So you can play Captain, then play the last workshop in the pile, and that workshop can gain itself since it is still there, right?
Yup!
-
Do you gain them? I'd imagine it would work like Masquerade. Or is that why the "quotes"?
Yes, that's why I used quotes. It would be like Masquerade. The phrase "and hence not gained" should also be fixed to something like "and hence would not be yours".
-
Maybe a weird question, but are these cards one or two promos? I mean, are they released in one pack or are they separate? I guess this could be different when they are given as free promos and when they are later sold on BGG...
-
Donald (or testers), you mention in the secret history that you didn't want to do the "2$ less than this" thing on Captain, which seems very reasonable. Was "less than Duchy" taken in consideration?
Incidentally, you hinted at an errata fixing the BoM/Ferry/Captain thing (in addition to using "leaving it there" technology on BoM I assume). Do you already have a fix in mind? I'm having trouble coming up with a simple one, apart from simply blocking BoM-Durations.
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
Wouldn't that argument apply to every (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) cost card?
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
Wouldn't that argument apply to every (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) cost card?
Forge and Expand are not cards you need too many of copies of (early on). Inheritance definitely has the problem that a player early on gets a significant lead. King's Court as well, if you connect it with an appropriate action. Bank is not a great card and Opulent Castle not available early on.
But Captain is likely to help you get another Captain and there's often a good reason to do so. Therefore, hitting $7 early snowballs more than with a $6 cost Captain.
-
An early Forge, in the absence of other good trashing, can be game-deciding.
-
if you use Captain on an Island, is it instantly gaining the Island from the Supply? or does "leave it there" supercede that and you just dump a card from your hand on your island mat?
Island works like any other one-shot.... "leave it there" prevents the card from moving, so the Island will not move to the Island mat, just like how Embargo will not move to the trash. You will still put a card from your hand onto your Island mat.
Specifically, the Lose Track rule causes this. "Leaving it there" makes it stay in the supply when it is played instead of moving to your play area like normal. And then when it gets to "Put this on to your Island mat", that instruction fails because that instruction expects Island to be in-play, but it isn't.
I'm kind of confused about this. The wording is ambiguous as to when the "leave it there" instruction actually applies. "Leave it there" obviously applies before you follow any of the card's instructions, because thing it's negating is the moving of the card into your play area. But does it continue to apply during the period when you're following the card's instructions? Because that's when the trashing of Death Cart etc actually happens. You could make the argument that it does, but based on the wording alone, I think you could also make the argument that it doesn't.
-
I'm kind of confused about this. The wording is ambiguous as to when the "leave it there" instruction actually applies. "Leave it there" obviously applies before you follow any of the card's instructions, because thing it's negating is the moving of the card into your play area. But does it continue to apply during the period when you're following the card's instructions? Because that's when the trashing of Death Cart etc actually happens. You could make the argument that it does, but based on the wording alone, I think you could also make the argument that it doesn't.
This also came up with Necromancer. It only means that you don't put it in play as part of playing it. When you're resolving it, everything works as normal. There is no ongoing effect of that clause. So you can play Workshop to gain a Workshop (which happens to be itself), or play Lurker to trash a Lurker (which happens to be itself).
(When you get to trashing Death Cart, that fails because the Death Cart isn't in play, where it's expected to be.)
-
(Summary of Discord discussion below. If I understand correctly, the interaction was originally described by Seprix during Playtesting)
In the presence of ferry, band of misfits and any other cost reducer, Captain enables the following infinite loop:
(1) Buy ferry on Captain
(2) Play cost reducer
(3)
(a) Play Captain as Band of Misfits
(b) Play Band of Misfits as Captain
(c) Goto a
While this does not do anything on the turn it is played, it allows you to play an arbitrary number of cards costing up to 4, at the beginning of next turn.
With Adventures tokens, the loop can do some serious work on the turn it's played as well.
-
if you use Captain on an Island, is it instantly gaining the Island from the Supply? or does "leave it there" supercede that and you just dump a card from your hand on your island mat?
Island works like any other one-shot.... "leave it there" prevents the card from moving, so the Island will not move to the Island mat, just like how Embargo will not move to the trash. You will still put a card from your hand onto your Island mat.
Specifically, the Lose Track rule causes this. "Leaving it there" makes it stay in the supply when it is played instead of moving to your play area like normal. And then when it gets to "Put this on to your Island mat", that instruction fails because that instruction expects Island to be in-play, but it isn't.
I'm kind of confused about this. The wording is ambiguous as to when the "leave it there" instruction actually applies. "Leave it there" obviously applies before you follow any of the card's instructions, because thing it's negating is the moving of the card into your play area. But does it continue to apply during the period when you're following the card's instructions? Because that's when the trashing of Death Cart etc actually happens. You could make the argument that it does, but based on the wording alone, I think you could also make the argument that it doesn't.
“Leaving it there” just means “don’t move it into play like you normally would when you play a card.” It does not directly have to do with not trashing a one-shot, or not moving Island to your Island Mat. However the Lose Track rule prevents one-shots from being trashed, or Island from moving to your Island Mat, because the card is in the supply, instead of in play instruction is expecting it to be.
-
Donald (or testers), you mention in the secret history that you didn't want to do the "2$ less than this" thing on Captain, which seems very reasonable. Was "less than Duchy" taken in consideration?
Incidentally, you hinted at an errata fixing the BoM/Ferry/Captain thing (in addition to using "leaving it there" technology on BoM I assume). Do you already have a fix in mind? I'm having trouble coming up with a simple one, apart from simply blocking BoM-Durations.
I did not consider "costing less than Duchy." That's weird but does the trick.
That's the fix; roughly "Play a cheaper non-Duration Action card from the Supply, leaving it there."
The point to non-duration isn't so much to get rid of the 3+ card combo, it's because the tracking is so poor on duration cards (similarly Necromancer says non-duration). I don't think I'd change the card just for that, but I already really want to change it to not shapeshift.
-
Donald (or testers), you mention in the secret history that you didn't want to do the "2$ less than this" thing on Captain, which seems very reasonable. Was "less than Duchy" taken in consideration?
I did not consider "costing less than Duchy." That's weird but does the trick.
Except, of course, for the edge case (there's always an edge case! ::)) of playing Storyteller (or BM), then Quarry, then Captain.
-
Can captain play as a card from an empty supply pile?
-
Can captain play as a card from an empty supply pile?
No. You have to choose a card in the supply to play; an empty pile does not contain any cards to choose.
-
Can captain play as a card from an empty supply pile?
Note that Captain is not played as anything.
-
By the way, whatever happened to this? http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19706.0
-
By the way, whatever happened to this? http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19706.0
It was released a few days ago.
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
Wouldn't that argument apply to every (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) cost card?
Forge and Expand are not cards you need too many of copies of (early on). Inheritance definitely has the problem that a player early on gets a significant lead. King's Court as well, if you connect it with an appropriate action. Bank is not a great card and Opulent Castle not available early on.
But Captain is likely to help you get another Captain and there's often a good reason to do so. Therefore, hitting $7 early snowballs more than with a $6 cost Captain.
This analysis rings hollow because 6$ is already one of the "swing" costs. 6$ on turn 3/4 is far from guaranteed. Virtually all the sixes are designed not to create problems with unequal access on turns 3/4, earlier altars run out of stuff to trash faster, an early Hunting Grounds has arrived before the villages have and no one plays BM anymore, that night-duration-attack-gold thing misses the reshuffle more early and doesn't attack as hard until later. Saying that it shouldn't cost 7 is kind of a concession that it shouldn't cost 6 and that it should cost five and then this is a really strong 5 this is maybe unprintable at any cost. I was trying not to say that in a thread DXV is frequenting but man you brought me there. Very very possible actually playing with it will prove me wrong, of course, but the card looks very nutty.
-
By the way, whatever happened to this? http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=19706.0
in the English game it's Church
the name there is used in the German version (apparently)
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
Wouldn't that argument apply to every (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) cost card?
Forge and Expand are not cards you need too many of copies of (early on). Inheritance definitely has the problem that a player early on gets a significant lead. King's Court as well, if you connect it with an appropriate action. Bank is not a great card and Opulent Castle not available early on.
But Captain is likely to help you get another Captain and there's often a good reason to do so. Therefore, hitting $7 early snowballs more than with a $6 cost Captain.
This analysis rings hollow because 6$ is already one of the "swing" costs. 6$ on turn 3/4 is far from guaranteed. Virtually all the sixes are designed not to create problems with unequal access on turns 3/4, earlier altars run out of stuff to trash faster, an early Hunting Grounds has arrived before the villages have and no one plays BM anymore, that night-duration-attack-gold thing misses the reshuffle more early and doesn't attack as hard until later. Saying that it shouldn't cost 7 is kind of a concession that it shouldn't cost 6 and that it should cost five and then this is a really strong 5 this is maybe unprintable at any cost. I was trying not to say that in a thread DXV is frequenting but man you brought me there. Very very possible actually playing with it will prove me wrong, of course, but the card looks very nutty.
I can think of two $6 cards that are pretty swingy: Goons, because the discard attack makes it harder for the other player to get to $6, and Grand Market, because the benefit makes it easier for you to get more.
-
Captain reads a lot like a 7$
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even more difficult than $6.
Wouldn't that argument apply to every (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/b/bc/Coin7.png/16px-Coin7.png) cost card?
Forge and Expand are not cards you need too many of copies of (early on). Inheritance definitely has the problem that a player early on gets a significant lead. King's Court as well, if you connect it with an appropriate action. Bank is not a great card and Opulent Castle not available early on.
But Captain is likely to help you get another Captain and there's often a good reason to do so. Therefore, hitting $7 early snowballs more than with a $6 cost Captain.
This analysis rings hollow because 6$ is already one of the "swing" costs. 6$ on turn 3/4 is far from guaranteed. Virtually all the sixes are designed not to create problems with unequal access on turns 3/4, earlier altars run out of stuff to trash faster, an early Hunting Grounds has arrived before the villages have and no one plays BM anymore, that night-duration-attack-gold thing misses the reshuffle more early and doesn't attack as hard until later. Saying that it shouldn't cost 7 is kind of a concession that it shouldn't cost 6 and that it should cost five and then this is a really strong 5 this is maybe unprintable at any cost. I was trying not to say that in a thread DXV is frequenting but man you brought me there. Very very possible actually playing with it will prove me wrong, of course, but the card looks very nutty.
I can think of two $6 cards that are pretty swingy: Goons, because the discard attack makes it harder for the other player to get to $6, and Grand Market, because the benefit makes it easier for you to get more.
I agree. Don't they feel awful? Especially Goons.
-
Hot take: Captain does not strike me as super powerful. Church, on the other hand, seems very good, though it will not always be your go-to trasher if quicker options are available *and* the save effect isn't super necessary (often it will be, but not always).
-
COMBOS WITH SCOUT (RIP)
Captain: Oh, what could have been. Cruel world! Captain lets you play a Scout now, and then play a Scout next turn, and boom goes the dynamite, as they say. Since you're usually willing to pay up to $6 for your first Scout, this is just giving you some additional flexibility on something you were going to do anyway. Watch out for the Scout pile to run, though. That can really wreck your day.
Church: It's important here to make sure you set aside non-Green cards—your Actions, Treasures, etc.—and let your Green cards get discarded, go back into your shuffle, and get picked up by your Scouts. For instance, when you buy an early Duchy, Church might tempt you to make it skip the reshuffle, but then it will be like your 5th and 6th Scout were for nothing. Sad times.
-
That seems like a fairer price but it would make it swingier I suppose, because hitting $7 is even m
I can think of two $6 cards that are pretty swingy: Goons, because the discard attack makes it harder for the other player to get to $6, and Grand Market, because the benefit makes it easier for you to get more.
It’s really hard to hit an early grand market when u can’t have coppers in play. But goons is horrible. I agree
-
COMBOS WITH SCOUT (RIP)
Oh, how I have missed these.
-
This analysis rings hollow because 6$ is already one of the "swing" costs. 6$ on turn 3/4 is far from guaranteed.
Having played a bit with Captain, I agree. It sucks when your opponent hits $6 early on. Then the Captain will help a lot to get more Captains. (Artisan for example can't gain itself and makes it rather harder to hit $6 again.)
Overlord has a debt cost to make it available with fewer coins to everyone, but still be reasonably expensive to not run very often.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
Furthermore, in multiplayer games piles get drained more quickly and then we run into the issue that we know from BoM: the village pile is empty and Captain fails to be able to fulfill that critical function of a flexible engine piece (yeah, you can still use it as something like Lost City spread over two turns even if you merely player Pearl Diver twice).
I also doubt that the card will be as centralizing as Goon or Lost Arts.
-
I was trying not to say that in a thread DXV is frequenting but man you brought me there.
It's okay, I can take it.
-
any rough idea when these'll be available via bgg?
-
any rough idea when these'll be available via bgg?
I think that's entirely up to BGG, who you could ask.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7.
Agreed
If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
Weaker than KC =/= shouldn't be a $7. KC is OP AF. I still agreed that it's fine at $6, that's just not a good argument
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
This is not sound logic. In order to play KC-Poacher, you need to already have a Poacher, and connect the two. The cost of that is $11 and 2 buys and the cost of connecting.
-
It's not always good to talk "balance" per se with Dominion cards due to the unique qualities of the game. One reason I would have liked it more at seven is it would force you to pick up some essential kingdom must haves earlier instead of relying on a shapeshifter that provides the same service but does something different in a pinch. Like you can probably skip lots of 3-4$ trashers and expect to hit six early, then feel terrible the times you don't, but I think it'd be correct. And once the trashing is done with, this card switches to doing other things. Can you imagine even looking at a Spice Merchant on a Captain board? Seems like paying 4$ for a curse when you could also not pay 4$ for a curse.
-
Having just played my first game with Church, it really seems like more of a Tactician-esque utility card than a trasher. I mean, yes, it can trash, but as a single-card trasher that's twice as likely to miss the reshuffle, it's fairly slow at it. For example, in my game, the only trashers were Church and Amulet. I bought one of each early on, and I'm definitely glad I had Amulet and not just Church (even with the two of them, it took me a while to trash all of my starting cards).
On the other hand, Church is great for spiking higher price points. In the game I played, I got an early Gold followed by an early Platinum just by saving most or all of my money for next turn (and then quickly got a couple more Platinums). It can also be used for smoothing, for improving your Engine's reliability by saving spare components, or for making green cards miss the reshuffle. Definitely a fun card---just don't use it as a reason to skip another trasher.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
This is not sound logic. In order to play KC-Poacher, you need to already have a Poacher, and connect the two. The cost of that is $11 and 2 buys and the cost of connecting.
I don't think you would skip Poacher in either situation, with Captain or KC in the Kingdom. So it is a sunk cost, a decision you made early in the game to improve your economy no matter what.
Anyway, I am totally aware that this vanilla thing is imprecise but it nonetheless illustrates that Captain is likely weaker than KC (impossible to compare Captain with Forge or Expand) and thus priced correctly.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
This is not sound logic. In order to play KC-Poacher, you need to already have a Poacher, and connect the two. The cost of that is $11 and 2 buys and the cost of connecting.
I don't think you would skip Poacher in either situation, with Captain or KC in the Kingdom. So it is a sunk cost, a decision you made early in the game to improve your economy no matter what.
Anyway, I am totally aware that this vanilla thing is imprecise but it nonetheless illustrates that Captain is likely weaker than KC (impossible to compare Captain with Forge or Expand) and thus priced correctly.
Being weaker than KC doesn't mean that it needs to cost less than it...
Also, you keep ignoring captain's biggest strength over kc, that it doesn't need to collide with anything.
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
This is not sound logic. In order to play KC-Poacher, you need to already have a Poacher, and connect the two. The cost of that is $11 and 2 buys and the cost of connecting.
I don't think you would skip Poacher in either situation, with Captain or KC in the Kingdom. So it is a sunk cost, a decision you made early in the game to improve your economy no matter what.
Anyway, I am totally aware that this vanilla thing is imprecise but it nonetheless illustrates that Captain is likely weaker than KC (impossible to compare Captain with Forge or Expand) and thus priced correctly.
Being weaker than KC doesn't mean that it needs to cost less than it...
Also, you keep ignoring captain's biggest strength over kc, that it doesn't need to collide with anything.
Right, as a basic illustration, this sentence: "Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn".. actually no. Captain+Poacher, as compared to King's Court+Poacher, is +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png) this turn; because if we're comparing it to King's Court, we're talking about having both Captain and Poacher in hand. Captain gives +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png) if used to play a Poacher from the supply, and the Poacher in your hand gives another +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png).
-
I don't think that Captain is a $7. A simple heuristic is vanilla stuff (sure, there is other stuff like Captain being bad because it is a Duration and misses shuffles and being good because doing stuff at the start of your turn increases concistency). If you play around with it you can easily see that it is weaker than KC. For example Captain-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +1 Action, +2 Coins whereas KC-Peddler has net effects of +1 Card, +2 Actions, +3 Coins.
I mean. Sure. But you can't make Captain hit Peddler the second time, and the first is capital-T tricky because you'd need to hit it with a bunch of cost reduction first. Also can you talk through those numbers? I'm not seeing how you're getting them.
Yeah, I meant Poacher, the modern Peddler.
Captainer-Poacher is +1 Coin this turn and next turn it is what Poacher says: +1 Card, +1 Action, +1 Coin
The gross effect of KC-Poacher is triple everything. But you played two cards so you net draw only 1, you had to play an Action to play KC so you only net 2 Actions and you get all the 3 Coins.
Viewing at the net effects of the vanilla stuff never gets the entire picture as it ignores all the important subtleties. But it is a good way to start (in case it is still not clear, when you play a card you gotta do -1 Card and -1 Action to get to the net effects; a cantrip is thus neutral).
This is not sound logic. In order to play KC-Poacher, you need to already have a Poacher, and connect the two. The cost of that is $11 and 2 buys and the cost of connecting.
I don't think you would skip Poacher in either situation, with Captain or KC in the Kingdom. So it is a sunk cost, a decision you made early in the game to improve your economy no matter what.
Anyway, I am totally aware that this vanilla thing is imprecise but it nonetheless illustrates that Captain is likely weaker than KC (impossible to compare Captain with Forge or Expand) and thus priced correctly.
Being weaker than KC doesn't mean that it needs to cost less than it...
Also, you keep ignoring captain's biggest strength over kc, that it doesn't need to collide with anything.
And we can't ignore KC's biggest strength: it's bonkers when it collides with itself and pretty much anything. The value of additional Captains to your deck is additive.
It's at least "good" in most circumstances, but it's still a duration and hence the effect of spiking it early can be mitigated by it missing the shuffle more often than non-durations.
-
I think a better comparison for Captain is Prince. We side step the whole issue about how much is it worth to interact with $5s and up (which is obviously the biggest value with Kc compared to Cap), they both give you benefit of playing the card at the turn start (e.g. can draw before Silos), and they both allow you to gain "unique" abilities on boards (e.g. generating >5 card hands with no net draw).
Prince requires you to buy and collide the $4. Prince is turn delayed from when you play it; and worse is a always a dead terminal when you play it. Prince cannot use durations as durations (e.g. Prince of Churches or Gears can work, but has to give up a lot of their utility). Prince is locked into what you put on the mat (e.g. once a village, always a village). Prince costs $8.
What can, and usually does, make Prince better? Prince never gets destroyed by piles emptying. Prince gets the amped version of the card twice as often. Prince never bottom decks once in play. Prince can play multiple terminal on its own.
Cap can introduce a huge weakness into your deck. If using him with cantrips is your only +action, the other guy may be able to tank your deck just by piling the cantrips, which are often cards you want to build up to $6. It is worse if you are using him for your draw. A functional engine vs a tanked one is something like 8V per turn; avoiding that will often be worth double.
Okay, but say you have a board where there are plenty of good Cap/Prince targets, how much is Prince better here? Well for $12 with Cap I get one "normal" version of the card and one free +1 action/+1 card effect. With a $12 Prince setup I get one $4 and one free +1 a/+ 1 card effect. Double Cap is then basically gaining the advantage of having one more $4 in deck. Of course this also means you need to draw your "$4". Of course getting two Caps will often completely offset Princes of penalty of coming online a turn later. Advantage to Cap, but not by all that much. Going to $7, though would likely make me prefer Prince on most boards; after all on most engine boards the majority of my non-VP gains are going to come on >=$8 coin hands or <$6 hands; not to mention that it is vastly easier to sneak in some sort of "gain a $4" than "gain a $6". $14 vs $12 (or $11) is starting to delay my engine by a turn and that is costly.
Bottom decking is utterly huge. Prince of Smithies is an 8 card hand for the rest of the game. Cap of Smithies needs 12.5% of your deck to be Caps. For larger decks, that starts becoming hard to ensure (e.g. needing 3 for 20 cards) and if you clump at deck bottom you may have a lot of really subpar hands in this shuffle and the next. Like Wharf or Fishing village, Cap is going to be more reliable when your deck starts to green than regular villages and draw … but when it tanks it tanks hard. At high skill play, you should expect at least a few turns with busted shuffles so paying more for Cap than Prince becomes challenging.
Cap, at best, can manage two terminals without support. This is not enough for a Hop deck. It also means you have trouble managing combos. For instance Bish/Terminal gainer can allow you load up on Silvers and then build out to a very high VP/turn Golden deck (in theory 15 VP/turn but easily 7 VP/turn). On such a pure terminal board these are incredibly strong (e.g. Militia/Masq).
Cap at $6 makes double Cap pretty close to Prince of whatever at "$12". Yeah I will buy Cap often instead of Prince on a lot of boards. More often I will buy Cap and then drop a Prince of whatever might run out and cruise. But fundamentally they are around the same functionality and around the same price.
After all, what are the major effect of increasing price from $6 to $7? Yeah it can make early gain more swingy. But more often it delays the gain a shuffle. It also makes it far harder to build out in the standard $16 engine. Getting to $9 - where you can now buy a Cap and a silver, means drawing the Silvers and a buy. Getting to $10 is likely a full gain later (call it half a turn). Getting to $12 is two golds and three silvers. Getting to $14 means gaining another gold and at least half a turn later. In the late game going to $7 means that you will much more rarely have to choose between a duchy and another Cap. Going to $6 means there are a lot more turns where you are nearing the end of the shuffle and being able to increase your odds of a big turn are worth more than locking in 3 VP this turn.
I would need a very good argument to say that Cap should be $7 when Prince/$4 parallels so nicely with double Cap. I cannot say that double Cap or Prince is generally better, but I would be surprised if I didn't buy a lot fewer Caps/more Princes if Cap went to $7.
-
Having played a few games with Church, it feels pretty powerful - more for the potential to line up strong combos than the trashing - e.g. I had an encampment game where I used it to put a gold/plunder in hand every turn, which pretty much ensured I could draw my deck without any risk of losing my encampments.
With something like a village/smithy engine, if you have drawn your deck (or drawn enough to hit the target spend) with a spare pair in hand, you can guarantee a good turn next turn - and you can hide at least one green out of the shuffle at the same time, which is pretty strong.
It also combos really well with Menagerie - being able to thin out duplicates mid turn without spending an action means that with a few Churches in a deck you can keep the Menageries firing even on large hand sizes.
The extra deck thinning felt more a bonus than anything else (making the trashing mandatory might have been interesting!).
-
Of course Haven and Gear do the same thing, being better/worse in different ways. I guess these can be called Haven variants.
-
I would need a very good argument to say that Cap should be $7 when Prince/$4 parallels so nicely with double Cap. I cannot say that double Cap or Prince is generally better, but I would be surprised if I didn't buy a lot fewer Caps/more Princes if Cap went to $7.
There's a Cap discussion in an ongoing thread started by Seprix. For those who like abbreviations, I would suggest Cpt.
The strength of Captain very much depends on the kingdom. Recently I had a board with Workers' Village, Throne Room, Conclave, and Spice Merchant. Captain was really versatile here. Prince needs only one card to shine, but is much less adaptive to the current board.
-
I've been checking occasionally to see if Captain and Church are available on the BGG store, and I just noticed they are both currently available for purchase. You can see all the available promos here: https://boardgamegeekstore.com/collections/dominion-promos
-
I played a few games against Lord B with Captain, BoM, Ferry and then either Highway or Bridge.
I think the way to do it is play ferry on Captain as soon as possible, get the Captain and the Highway/Bridge and then try and connect them (using whatever else is there)
Bridge was MUCH better than Highway - for two reasons. (1) You can't use Captain to play Highway until you have played a Highway first - which means you can't play $5 cards at the start of your turn, and (2) When Captain plays Highway it doesn't activate the cost reduction.
The impact of that is I was generally connecting Highway-Captain around turn 8 or 9. Whereas Captain-Bridge was connecting on turns 4-5.
In all cases after the connection is made the game ended (massively) the next turn. There always seemed to be some set of <$5 cards that when you played an unlimited number of them I was able to empty the provinces (and usually all the duchies and the estates and once all the silvers when that got me VP).
(I did not test Bridge Troll, but Canal came up randomly one time, and I managed to use it.)
I guess none of this is too surprising, but it was interesting (if a little tedious) to see it play out in practice. One "technique" I discovered that was helpful - especially for the Highway version - was switching the Ferry to a different card after you connect the Highway-Captain. It lets you start the next turn playing an unlimited number of the $5-$6 card you choose.
Obviously the chances of this combo ever coming up in a real game is close to zero (I'm sure someone ran the odds), but if it ever does, boy am I ready!
Ed
-
The impact of that is I was generally connecting Highway-Captain around turn 8 or 9. Whereas Captain-Bridge was connecting on turns 4-5.
I might be missing something here, but don't you need a village to play Captain and Bridge in the same turn? The idea is to play BoM with the Captain, right? How can this happen on turn 4? Even without the Village, how can you draw both Bridge and Captain on turn 4? Assuming you spent the three first turns buying Ferry, Captain and Bridge, either the Bridge or the Captain is not shuffled in yet, right?
-
The impact of that is I was generally connecting Highway-Captain around turn 8 or 9. Whereas Captain-Bridge was connecting on turns 4-5.
I might be missing something here, but don't you need a village to play Captain and Bridge in the same turn? The idea is to play BoM with the Captain, right? How can this happen on turn 4? Even without the Village, how can you draw both Bridge and Captain on turn 4? Assuming you spent the three first turns buying Ferry, Captain and Bridge, either the Bridge or the Captain is not shuffled in yet, right?
I don't see why you would actually buy Bridge... you play Captain to play Bridge. At the start of next turn, Bridge is played again, for free, so on that turn you can just play Captain to play BoM, back and forth. You do need 2 Captains though.
-
The impact of that is I was generally connecting Highway-Captain around turn 8 or 9. Whereas Captain-Bridge was connecting on turns 4-5.
I might be missing something here, but don't you need a village to play Captain and Bridge in the same turn? The idea is to play BoM with the Captain, right? How can this happen on turn 4? Even without the Village, how can you draw both Bridge and Captain on turn 4? Assuming you spent the three first turns buying Ferry, Captain and Bridge, either the Bridge or the Captain is not shuffled in yet, right?
I don't see why you would actually buy Bridge... you play Captain to play Bridge. At the start of next turn, Bridge is played again, for free, so on that turn you can just play Captain to play BoM, back and forth. You do need 2 Captains though.
Right. I was thinking that "connecting" means connecting Captain and Bridge. So, with Ferry + Captain, you can play Captain on turn 3 and buy another Captain. You need to play the Captain as something that gets you through your deck (Smithy, Warehouse) I guess, in order to play the second Captain on turn 4. You then start turn 4 playing Bridge.
-
After Church and Captain release we have exactly 10 promos. What do you think about the kingdom made out of them?
( 3 ) Black Market, Church
( 4 ) Dismantle, Envoy, Walled Village
( 4|5 ) Sauna/Avanto
( 5 ) Stash, Governor
( 6 ) Captain
( 8 ) Prince
-
After Church and Captain release we have exactly 10 promos. What do you think about the kingdom made out of them?
( 3 ) Black Market, Church
( 4 ) Dismantle, Envoy, Walled Village
( 4|5 ) Sauna/Avanto
( 5 ) Stash, Governor
( 6 ) Captain
( 8 ) Prince
You open Black Market (for the attack) and Church. You try to get Captain as soon as possible. Every card could possibly have a place (some of them maybe only through Captain), except I don't know if there will be time for Prince. And of course you skip Stash. Governor might dominate.
-
After Church and Captain release we have exactly 10 promos. What do you think about the kingdom made out of them?
( 3 ) Black Market, Church
( 4 ) Dismantle, Envoy, Walled Village
( 4|5 ) Sauna/Avanto
( 5 ) Stash, Governor
( 6 ) Captain
( 8 ) Prince
You can also fit Summon in here, since it's an Event.
-
After Church and Captain release we have exactly 10 promos. What do you think about the kingdom made out of them?
( 3 ) Black Market, Church
( 4 ) Dismantle, Envoy, Walled Village
( 4|5 ) Sauna/Avanto
( 5 ) Stash, Governor
( 6 ) Captain
( 8 ) Prince
Can't really say without knowing what's in the Black Market deck :P
-
Pull a cost-reducer out of the Black Market deck and Prince Governor.
-
So much slower than straight Governor
-
So much slower than straight Governor
And yet more fun!