ToadyA variation on +2 Cards and +1 Buy. You get more cards if you find a Potion or can name one of the two cards you draw. Its cost has you buying Toadies when your deck has a bit more variety than just Coppers and Estates.
Types: Action
Cost: $3P
Name a card. Reveal the top 2 cards of your deck and then put them into your hand. If either was the named card or a Potion, play this again. Otherwise, +1 Buy.
A thing I once posted (and refined through the help of others) on the Discord server:
(https://i.postimg.cc/Pxhm134L/22-Capital-City.png)
I think it fits this week's rules considering that this card requires a little more thinking about when you want to play this during your turn.
The 2 additional Provinces may push you toward building a little more, and Capital City's extra Buy and payload you get when you do indeed build big and play a lot of cards on your turns should reward that.
Why does it have the big gaps like that? I don't think it needs the giant spaces.
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?title=Special%3AFilePath&file=Devil's_Workshop.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?title=Special%3AFilePath&file=Ironworks.jpg)
Why does it have the big gaps like that? I don't think it needs the giant spaces.
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?title=Special%3AFilePath&file=Devil's_Workshop.jpg) (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?title=Special%3AFilePath&file=Ironworks.jpg)
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/5/51/Sacrifice.jpg)
@silverspawn: Would you consider cards like Treasure Map or Leprechaun as having a high skill ceiling?
Prophet
Type: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Cards
+1 Sin
You may discard any number of treasures, revealed. For each $2 they would have produced, draw a card. You may play a Messiah from your hand.
(https://i.imgur.com/MtNEeAX.png)QuoteProphetNow it's helpful to discard coppers at the chance of drawing something better (before buying Messiah), and also gives you the option to discard silvers, golds, or other treasures each for only +1 Card after you have bought Messiah.
Type: Action
Cost: $2
+$2
+1 Sin
You may discard any number of Treasure cards, revealed, then draw that many. You may play a Messiah card from your hand.
Messiah
Type: Action
Cost: $5
If you have a Prophet in play, you may trash it and this to remove all your Sins. Otherwise, +$3
---
While this is in play, you may not buy Messiah
[Side note - my images appear to be huge, at least on my screen. Can someone give me advice on how to get them to a reasonable size? I downloaded file from shardofhonor's site, then uploaded to imgur and used the BBCode here]
[Side note - my images appear to be huge, at least on my screen. Can someone give me advice on how to get them to a reasonable size? I downloaded file from shardofhonor's site, then uploaded to imgur and used the BBCode here]
[img width=250]something.png[/img]
Chamberlain • $4 • Action - Duration
Now and at the start of your next 3 turns, choose one you haven't picked yet:
+2 Cards; or +$2; or Trash 2 cards from your hand; or Gain a Copper to the top of your deck.
(https://i.imgur.com/mdIgH9O.png)
In addition to the choice of which card to emulate with it, Mayor also has the additional choice of whether you do so now or later.
(https://i.imgur.com/mdIgH9O.png)
In addition to the choice of which card to emulate with it, Mayor also has the additional choice of whether you do so now or later.
Does this stay out if you choose to emulate this turn? If so, then it's strictly better than Overlord, for a cheaper cost (not debt, but still.)
[Side note - my images appear to be huge, at least on my screen. Can someone give me advice on how to get them to a reasonable size? I downloaded file from shardofhonor's site, then uploaded to imgur and used the BBCode here]
Heya! Welcome! I added in a width attribute in your [ img ] tags that helps them display less huge
Sins are -1VP each, right?
Monkey's Paw
$4 - Action - Victory
Choose one: Gain a Curse and if you do, gain a Wish; or +$2 and you may have the player to your left gain this on top of their deck.
-
Worth 1 VP if you gained this after your last turn of the game. Otherwise, worth -2 VP.
(https://i.imgur.com/ncX17vv.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/81zHwdA.png)I heard that capitalists love the woods.
Revolution - $6
Event/Looter
Exile all Actions you have in play. At the start of your next turn, gain a Ruins; if you did, +1 VP per Action you have in Exile.
(https://trello-attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/5d34c84e360a440d0d16278b/601f5be360402b8a20554384/097faa915e3554ec768a5e924935a5a1/image.png)QuoteChamberlain • $5 • Action - Duration
Now and at the start of your next 3 turns, choose one you haven't picked yet:
+2 Cards; or +$2; or Trash 2 cards from your hand; or Gain a Copper to the top of your deck.
Entering this for the "lots of choices" and kinda "deck control" criteria. It's like a Steward, but better, until it isn't, then it's worse. I just about made my laptop melt opening illustrator to throw down some honestly pretty bad vector work so i guess i get to buy more ram now. Each option on the card is illustrated on the image so you can track it what you've done already with pennies or coin tokens or whatever you've got available. sharpie if you like making cards a whole lot.
I'm not sure on the $5 cost on this - I initially had it at $3 but that seemed way cheap.
Also i made some pretty interesting missteps that i'll post when the contest is over, they aren't good but they are kind of interesting thought experiments in "passable cards" that aren't actually "fun to play with".
(https://i.imgur.com/81zHwdA.png)
Exile all Actions you have in play. At the start of your next turn, gain a Ruins for +1 VP per Action you have in Exile.
my entry:QuoteMonkey's Paw
$4 - Action - Victory
Choose one: Gain a Curse and if you do, gain a Wish; or +$2 and you may have the player to your left gain this on top of their deck.
-
Worth 1 VP if you gained this after your last turn of the game. Otherwise, worth -2 VP.
Ancient Ruins - Action, $5 cost.It's either high skill or mundanely swingy.
+1 Buy
Trash the top card of your deck for +2VP. Choose either +Cards or +$ equal to its cost in $.
It looks strictly worse than Leprechaun to me.This is anything but strictly worse or better than anything because it is so different from existing cards.
(https://i.ibb.co/fnnqGfX/Musketeer.png) | (https://i.ibb.co/H44822g/Musketeer-mat.png) |
Musketeer $5 – Action Quote
| Musketeer mat Setup (before a game starts): Add 1 token to each section. When tokens are taken from the mat during the game: Horse section (left): Exchange for a Horse. Coffers section (top right): Move to your Coffers mat. Villager section (bottom right): Move to your Villagers mat. Edit: The Musketeer mat is shared by all players. |
I'm not sure this will work out as you intend.All for one and one for all. - Alexandre Dumas
It looks strictly worse than Leprechaun to me.This is anything but strictly worse or better than anything because it is so different from existing cards.
Leprechaun gains a Gold and you gotta work hard to make it also gain a Wish. Monkey's Paw always gains a Wish which is miles better than a Gold (or directly a $6, the flexibility matters more than the risk of drawing a Wish dead).
Leprechaun has two main uses: Gold for early payload or late game gainer. Monkey's Paw is more of a conventional, early game gainer that need trashing/sifting. Apples and oranges.
And even if the first option of Monkey's Paw is on average weaker than Leprachaun (not that anybody could really tell except after numerous games), Monkey's Paw features a second, hot potatoe option which you ironically deemed to be too strong.
"you may Pass this to the player on your left" (i.e. gain to their hand). Then if you end the game this turn, they get +1VP. Otherwise, they at least have the option/choice to Pass it to the next person instead of keeping it for -2VP.
"you may Pass this to the player on your left" (i.e. gain to their hand). Then if you end the game this turn, they get +1VP. Otherwise, they at least have the option/choice to Pass it to the next person instead of keeping it for -2VP.
Passing is not gaining; you cannot Watchtower the card you get passed via Masquerade, for example. With your suggested wording, passing Monkey's Paw would result in it always being worth -2(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) for your opponent, because they did not gain it at all and therefore did not "gain it after their last turn of the game."
I do agree with you that it's really hard/impossible to track the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) value of the Monkey's Paws, though. As currently worded, at least, each individual copy can be worth varying amounts of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png), which is impossible to track in an irl game.
Welcome to the forum! You certainly sound like someone who loves the game and will add energy to the community.
Regarding Prophet, introducing a concept like what discarded Treasures "would have produced" that doesn’t otherwise exist (and isn't defined) in Dominion, is problematic, particularly for the Treasures that produce variable $.
The current digital version of Bank probably "would have produced" $0 no matter what order you discard it in, since the other discarded Treasures aren’t "in play," but it might be understood to be worth more if Black Market or Storyteller played Treasures earlier in the turn. The physical version of Bank says "When you play this," so it seems to be worth $0 when discarded, since it wasn’t played (and now the recent change that Donald X made removing that language from Treasures, which wasn’t intended to be substantive, is potentially meaningful).
Philosopher's Stone and Diadem still say "When you play this" in all versions, so they’re worth $0, maybe? I don’t know.
The strangest effect is arguably to Fool’s Gold, particularly if you discard one copy. "If this is the first time you played Fool’s Gold this turn +$1, otherwise +$4." You didn’t play Fool’s Gold, so this isn’t the first time you played Fool’s Gold this turn, so I guess it’s worth $4?
My point is not that any of the specific interpretations above are the correct readings, just that without more definition, there isn't a clear way to construe any of it. And these are only a few examples. Even if you change the language to something like, "would have produced if you played them," it doesn’t work on its own absent more definition.
[Minor bits: (1) "treasures" should be capitalized; (2) you need something like "(rounded down)" after, "For each $2"; and (3) these days, "+1 Card" is preferred to "draw a card."]
ProphetNow it's helpful to discard coppers at the chance of drawing something better (before buying Messiah), and also gives you the option to discard silvers, golds, or other treasures each for only +1 Card after you have bought Messiah.
Type: Action
Cost: $2
+$2
+1 Sin
You may discard any number of Treasure cards, revealed, then draw that many. You may play a Messiah card from your hand.
(https://i.imgur.com/RtjHB8X.png)QuoteMessiah
Type: Action
Cost: $5
If you have a Prophet in play, you may trash it and this to remove all your Sins. Otherwise, +$3
---
While this is in play, you may not buy Messiah
Chessmaster
5$ Action-Command
Reveal any 3 cards from your deck. Discard the Commands and Non-Actions, and play the rest in any order. If you didn't play any cards, +1 Action.
----
Shoutout to S_Smarths for wording input on this, this was a pretty messy card before that.
So you look through your deck
It's a really neat idea to have "horse tokens"! When you exchange the tokens, are the Horses going into your discard pile as normal or into your hand?
I'm not sure this will work out as you intend.All for one and one for all. - Alexandre Dumas
It is rather penalising to take the tokens as you don't get the Peddler effect - so you want to do it as little as possible. The tokens that benefit most from being stockpiled are Coffers. So in the large majority of cases, I think it will be best to stockpile Coffers and cash in once at the end.
Used this way, Musketeer is like a super-Baker; you get the cash now AND the Coffers. That is a bit too strong for the price point, and also kind of boring. If you want the other tokens to be more usable, then I think it needs to be easier to retrieve them.
It is rather penalising to take the tokens as you don't get the Peddler effect - so you want to do it as little as possible.
Used this way, Musketeer is like a super-Baker; you get the cash now AND the Coffers.
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
So you look through your deck
Not as worded. As worded, you only see the 3 revealed cards. And I'm pretty sure that's the intention.
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
Well, the current Musketeer only takes your tokens from one section of the mat. Segura's suggestion is to take the tokens from all of them instead.
Gambit, you may want to clarify in the OP that there is only one communal Musketeer Mat for all players, as that wasn't immediately obvious (to me at least).
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
Well, the current Musketeer only takes your tokens from one section of the mat. Segura's suggestion is to take the tokens from all of them instead.
Yes, I understand that. But what are the intended consequences?
So you look through your deck
Not as worded. As worded, you only see the 3 revealed cards. And I'm pretty sure that's the intention.
I think "Reveal three cards from anywhere in your deck" would be clearer. I think the word "any" is throwing me off in the current wording. Like, if I know I have three Labs somewhere in my deck, can I reveal them?
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
Well, the current Musketeer only takes your tokens from one section of the mat. Segura's suggestion is to take the tokens from all of them instead.
Yes, I understand that. But what are the intended consequences?
Only allowing you to take tokens from one section of the mat at a time in a way punishes you for varying which section of the mat you add tokens to. Segura believes that this will result in players just stockpiling all their Musketeer tokens on the Coffers section and neglecting the other sections, and that allowing you to take tokens from every section would fix that. I agree with him there.
Exhaust v2
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it. If this is the first time you've bought Exhaust this turn: +1 Buy.
Event
$0
Exhaust v1
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
Well, the current Musketeer only takes your tokens from one section of the mat. Segura's suggestion is to take the tokens from all of them instead.
Yes, I understand that. But what are the intended consequences?
Only allowing you to take tokens from one section of the mat at a time in a way punishes you for varying which section of the mat you add tokens to. Segura believes that this will result in players just stockpiling all their Musketeer tokens on the Coffers section and neglecting the other sections, and that allowing you to take tokens from every section would fix that. I agree with him there.
Is it really like that?
Imagine the following scenario: Early phase of a game with 3 players and each player already gained one Musketeer. On each section of the Musketeer mat is 1 token (starting condition).
Now player A plays their Musketeer. More often then not they will choose the Peddler option (i.e. they do not take any of the single tokens from the mat). Player A then adds a token to the mat. If Coffers are clearly more valuable than Villagers or Horses, they will add it to one of the latter sections, say Horses. Then player B plays their Musketeer. Again, it will be often better to use the Peddler option. Where does player B add the token? Villager section I would say. Now player C plays their Musketeer. It could be worth now to take the 2 Villagers (maybe they already had enough $ collected for their purchase). However, if player C doesn’t take any tokens from the mat, where do they add their token now?
In summary, if a certain type of token is clearly more valuable than the others (all of you think it is Coffers) then players will add tokens to the other sections of the mat. At a certain point, several Villagers or Horses should become more valuable than a single Coffers most of the time.
In most cases, the player to your left will have a chance to get rid of it after gaining it to the top of their deck if they have another turn. I don't think it needs the attack type. I also think it'll be pretty easy to remember if I passed you that Monkey's Paw on the last turn of the game to know it's VP worth."you may Pass this to the player on your left" (i.e. gain to their hand). Then if you end the game this turn, they get +1VP. Otherwise, they at least have the option/choice to Pass it to the next person instead of keeping it for -2VP.
Passing is not gaining; you cannot Watchtower the card you get passed via Masquerade, for example. With your suggested wording, passing Monkey's Paw would result in it always being worth -2(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) for your opponent, because they did not gain it at all and therefore did not "gain it after their last turn of the game."
I do agree with you that it's really hard/impossible to track the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) value of the Monkey's Paws, though. As currently worded, at least, each individual copy can be worth varying amounts of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png), which is impossible to track in an irl game.
I missed the fact that Passing is not gaining. Thanks. I haven't played with many "when you gain a card" cards before, and if this is intended to interact with those, it adds more confusion. If you keep "Pass", then you have to use and then define something like "Receive". My main reaction for this recommended change to Pass is so you can't give it to someone onto their deck, they have a hand with no actions and buy Duchy, then they draw it into their next hand now worth -2VP and the following player ends the game before they can get rid of it. In the absence of "when you gain a card" reactions, it's a political (target 1 person) attack near the end of the game. In their hand, they can at least give it to the next player once it switches from +1VP to -2VP.
I guess it could just say "the player to your left gains it to their hand".
There are definitely times when it is impossible to tell. Say I pass you a Monkey's Paw and then play 2 Torturers for Bad Omens first and War second. War flips and trashes Monkey's Paw; was it the one that you've just been passed or the one that was already in your deck?In most cases, the player to your left will have a chance to get rid of it after gaining it to the top of their deck if they have another turn. I don't think it needs the attack type. I also think it'll be pretty easy to remember if I passed you that Monkey's Paw on the last turn of the game to know it's VP worth."you may Pass this to the player on your left" (i.e. gain to their hand). Then if you end the game this turn, they get +1VP. Otherwise, they at least have the option/choice to Pass it to the next person instead of keeping it for -2VP.
Passing is not gaining; you cannot Watchtower the card you get passed via Masquerade, for example. With your suggested wording, passing Monkey's Paw would result in it always being worth -2(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) for your opponent, because they did not gain it at all and therefore did not "gain it after their last turn of the game."
I do agree with you that it's really hard/impossible to track the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png) value of the Monkey's Paws, though. As currently worded, at least, each individual copy can be worth varying amounts of (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/9/92/VP.png/16px-VP.png), which is impossible to track in an irl game.
I missed the fact that Passing is not gaining. Thanks. I haven't played with many "when you gain a card" cards before, and if this is intended to interact with those, it adds more confusion. If you keep "Pass", then you have to use and then define something like "Receive". My main reaction for this recommended change to Pass is so you can't give it to someone onto their deck, they have a hand with no actions and buy Duchy, then they draw it into their next hand now worth -2VP and the following player ends the game before they can get rid of it. In the absence of "when you gain a card" reactions, it's a political (target 1 person) attack near the end of the game. In their hand, they can at least give it to the next player once it switches from +1VP to -2VP.
I guess it could just say "the player to your left gains it to their hand".
(https://i.imgur.com/50uKk8J.png)I think this makes it too easy to just trash your deck on your final turn to gain a game-deciding advantage. At the very least, it should lose the +Buy.QuoteExhaust
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
(https://i.imgur.com/50uKk8J.png)I think this makes it too easy to just trash your deck on your final turn to gain a game-deciding advantage. At the very least, it should lose the +Buy.QuoteExhaust
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
(https://i.imgur.com/50uKk8J.png)I think this makes it too easy to just trash your deck on your final turn to gain a game-deciding advantage. At the very least, it should lose the +Buy.QuoteExhaust
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
(https://i.imgur.com/zBBNuVL.png)
I don’t think the Ruins issue is a big one. Way of the Horse is far worse in this respect. I agree though that the card should be nerfed somehow.(https://i.imgur.com/50uKk8J.png)I think this makes it too easy to just trash your deck on your final turn to gain a game-deciding advantage. At the very least, it should lose the +Buy.QuoteExhaust
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
Yes, or it should be limited to once per turn, or cost at least $2. As is, Exhaust also seriously nerfs Looters as it effectively turns any Ruins into a throned version of itself that trashes itself for free.
(https://i.imgur.com/zBBNuVL.png)
To avoid misunderstandings: you are allowed to look through your draw pile and reveal 3 cards form that? Or draw pile and discard pile? Or draw pile and discard pile and hand?
Oh, so you get to decide "I'll take the cards at positions #1, #3, and #8 from the top", but without looking at them?
Oh, so you get to decide "I'll take the cards at positions #1, #3, and #8 from the top", but without looking at them?
I'd nerf the Peddler effect somehow and buff the token taking effect via allowing the player to take the tokens from all sections. This (partly) fixes the "Coffers only" issue that faust mentioned.
What do you mean with taking tokens from all sections?
Well, the current Musketeer only takes your tokens from one section of the mat. Segura's suggestion is to take the tokens from all of them instead.
Yes, I understand that. But what are the intended consequences?
Only allowing you to take tokens from one section of the mat at a time in a way punishes you for varying which section of the mat you add tokens to. Segura believes that this will result in players just stockpiling all their Musketeer tokens on the Coffers section and neglecting the other sections, and that allowing you to take tokens from every section would fix that. I agree with him there.
Is it really like that?
Imagine the following scenario: Early phase of a game with 3 players and each player already gained one Musketeer. On each section of the Musketeer mat is 1 token (starting condition).
Now player A plays their Musketeer. More often then not they will choose the Peddler option (i.e. they do not take any of the single tokens from the mat). Player A then adds a token to the mat. If Coffers are clearly more valuable than Villagers or Horses, they will add it to one of the latter sections, say Horses. Then player B plays their Musketeer. Again, it will be often better to use the Peddler option. Where does player B add the token? Villager section I would say. Now player C plays their Musketeer. It could be worth now to take the 2 Villagers (maybe they already had enough $ collected for their purchase). However, if player C doesn’t take any tokens from the mat, where do they add their token now?
In summary, if a certain type of token is clearly more valuable than the others (all of you think it is Coffers) then players will add tokens to the other sections of the mat. At a certain point, several Villagers or Horses should become more valuable than a single Coffers most of the time.
I missed the fact that the mat is communal instead of personal (and I think segura and faust probably didn't realize that either). Ignore my previous comment.
Billet
Project - $5
Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may first play the set aside card.
Setup: Set aside an extra Kingdom card costing $3 or less.
I don’t think the Ruins issue is a big one. Way of the Horse is far worse in this respect. I agree though that the card should be nerfed somehow.(https://i.imgur.com/50uKk8J.png)I think this makes it too easy to just trash your deck on your final turn to gain a game-deciding advantage. At the very least, it should lose the +Buy.QuoteExhaust
+1 Buy
Replay a non-Duration Action card you played this turn that's still in play. Trash it.
Event
$0
Yes, or it should be limited to once per turn, or cost at least $2. As is, Exhaust also seriously nerfs Looters as it effectively turns any Ruins into a throned version of itself that trashes itself for free.
Also, what happens if the set aside card is a Victory card?Billet
Project - $5
Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may first play the set aside card.
Setup: Set aside an extra Kingdom card costing $3 or less.
Is the fact that this can set aside Treasures or Nights intended?
Yeah, as soon as I walked away I realised I needed to fix both those things. I've updated the wording in the original post:Also, what happens if the set aside card is a Victory card?Billet
Project - $5
Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may first play the set aside card.
Setup: Set aside an extra Kingdom card costing $3 or less.
Is the fact that this can set aside Treasures or Nights intended?
On another note, it should say "you may first play the set aside card, leaving it there.
Billet
Project - $5
Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may first play the set aside card, leaving it there.
Setup: Set aside an extra Action Kingdom card costing $3 or less.
Birthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)QuoteBirthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
A Prince variant, except that every player gets the bonus. Because of that, you have to design a deck and/or select an Action card that will help you more than it will help your opponent(s), even after foregoing a Gold (or other $6 buy) and despite the fact that each other player gets to use the Action card before you do.
I'm curious if you have any other purposes for the "Birthright mat" - is this part of a set of cards you have? Otherwise, I'm assuming the only reason it's "their" mat is in case they set aside an Action-Victory card instead of just an Action card (or else it could be a communal mat). Alternatively, couldn't you just say "Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply on this"?To be honest, I did not even consider a communal mat. I like to start with mechanics already in the game, and I am not aware of such a communal mat. The reason I did not put it on top of or under Birthright itself is that I wanted to borrow the mechanic from Inheritance of the card staying out of play (so that a player could use a card like Experiment). Inheritance uses a token, but since I wanted to have the possibility of multiple cards, a mat seemed like a pre-existing solution.
Would the card allow you to use Command cards, or should they be excluded like Durations?My first thought was that it shouldn't, but when I thought about it I changed my mind. My understanding is that the reason Command cards don't play other command cards is that they could, in theory, create loops. This card does not play the selected card on that turn, so even if it uses a Command card, it couldn't create such a loop (as far as I understand it). If there is another reason not to use a Command card, I would appreciate the input.
This card could really slow down the end of the game if each player starts getting multiple cards set aside. Each start-of-turn would be playing a good handful of cards before they even start their Action phase. To keep it a little more subdued, would it work better as a project (on purchase, when you place your cube you would also choose the card to set aside for it)? Or a "once per game" event?This is something I had not thought of. My inclination is that this is unlikely, as playing this card effectively is hard enough that I don't think multiple players will do it multiple times. I also don't think there will be much incentive to play Action cards with a lot of choices, as that will make it much more likely your opponent can use the card effectively. But I will definitely consider this part and think about reworking it.
(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)This should either say "that player may play the card" or be an attack. Imagine putting 2 Remakes onto the Birthright mat...QuoteBirthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
A Prince variant, except that every player gets the bonus. Because of that, you have to design a deck and/or select an Action card that will help you more than it will help your opponent(s), even after foregoing a Gold (or other $6 buy) and despite the fact that each other player gets to use the Action card before you do.
Potter (Action, $5)This is too strong. There are enough boards where you can consistently activate Swashbuckler, and Double-Lab+Market Square is way too good of an effect.
+3 Cards
+1 Buy
If your discard pile has any cards in it, +1 Action.
A Margrave-Swashbuckler hybrid that rewards you if you play it at the right time.
This contest is hard, especially since I'm a relatively "low-skilled" player. :DI'd try it at $1 - of all the states to check, 'is my deck empty' seems the rarest and most fleeting, even if combo'd with scavenger or messenger; the most common subtype of "is my deck empty" is probably going to happen when its all in your hand/drawn, so the +cards is moot then anyway.
(https://i.imgur.com/Unk6AD7.png)
At first glance, this appears to be a glorified Necropolis. Most players will be able to play this like a Lost City if they time it right, but I'm hoping that this card would really shine as a way to play cards you've gained in the same turn.
I wasn't sure if this should cost the same as a Shanty Town or if it should cost $2.
This contest is hard, especially since I'm a relatively "low-skilled" player. :DI'd try it at $1 - of all the states to check, 'is my deck empty' seems the rarest and most fleeting, even if combo'd with scavenger or messenger; the most common subtype of "is my deck empty" is probably going to happen when its all in your hand/drawn, so the +cards is moot then anyway.
(https://i.imgur.com/Unk6AD7.png)
At first glance, this appears to be a glorified Necropolis. Most players will be able to play this like a Lost City if they time it right, but I'm hoping that this card would really shine as a way to play cards you've gained in the same turn.
I wasn't sure if this should cost the same as a Shanty Town or if it should cost $2.
Potter (Action, $5)This is too strong. There are enough boards where you can consistently activate Swashbuckler, and Double-Lab+Market Square is way too good of an effect.
+3 Cards
+1 Buy
If your discard pile has any cards in it, +1 Action.
A Margrave-Swashbuckler hybrid that rewards you if you play it at the right time.
(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)This should either say "that player may play the card" or be an attack. Imagine putting 2 Remakes onto the Birthright mat...QuoteBirthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
A Prince variant, except that every player gets the bonus. Because of that, you have to design a deck and/or select an Action card that will help you more than it will help your opponent(s), even after foregoing a Gold (or other $6 buy) and despite the fact that each other player gets to use the Action card before you do.
Also I see no reason for this to stay in play; it can just trash itself upon play.
regarding the bigger problem of playing 10+ cards at the start of your turn, or double remake, or whatever, you could just have it replace the card on the birthright mat (which gets trashed or returned to the supply or something) - only one card there at a time.(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)This should either say "that player may play the card" or be an attack. Imagine putting 2 Remakes onto the Birthright mat...QuoteBirthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
A Prince variant, except that every player gets the bonus. Because of that, you have to design a deck and/or select an Action card that will help you more than it will help your opponent(s), even after foregoing a Gold (or other $6 buy) and despite the fact that each other player gets to use the Action card before you do.
I don't think it is an Attack, even if you put in a terrible card, because it effects you as well. I would echo the logic in Something_Smart (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=5611)'s post from last week's contest about giving each player Snow (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20665.msg861678#msg861678), drawing an analogy to using Messenger (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Messenger)'s on-buy effect to give every player a Curse. When it affects the player playing the card the same as everyone else, it's not an attack. So dropping in a Remake (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Remake) would be a huge pain, but it would be a pain for everyone.
It would also be weird mechanically, as the card continues affecting the players throughout the game. If one player played a Moat at the exact moment that happened, would they remain unaffected for the rest of the game, while the other players kept using the Action? How would that be tracked? It seems counter-intuitive.
That being said, the case of a double Remake is a problem, and what I would not want is for a player who is losing to be able to just tank the game and make it so that no one will be able to do anything (or, if they have emptied one Supply pile, that their one Victory card in exile or on a mat will win out after everyone's deck is trashed and they slowly buy out the Curses and Coppers pile). The reason I did not want to do "may play" is that I wanted an option to be playing a harmful card that would hurt you less. But I may have to give that option up to prevent the card from being terrible.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.Also I see no reason for this to stay in play; it can just trash itself upon play.
I took the parenthetical language directly from Hireling, which seems like the most mechanically similar card. Given that the card continues to do something at the start of every turn, it seems both consistent with the other game mechanics and practical for tracking purposes to have a card there.
Also, while I am still mulling over mathdude (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7726)'s suggestion that I limited it to one use per player per game, I certainly do not want there to be more than 10 cards playing each turn, which could be done if you pulled Birthright out of the trash with a Lurker (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Lurker), Graverobber (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Graverobber), or Rogue (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Rogue).
regarding the bigger problem of playing 10+ cards at the start of your turn, or double remake, or whatever, you could just have it replace the card on the birthright mat (which gets trashed or returned to the supply or something) - only one card there at a time.(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)This should either say "that player may play the card" or be an attack. Imagine putting 2 Remakes onto the Birthright mat...QuoteBirthright - $6
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
A Prince variant, except that every player gets the bonus. Because of that, you have to design a deck and/or select an Action card that will help you more than it will help your opponent(s), even after foregoing a Gold (or other $6 buy) and despite the fact that each other player gets to use the Action card before you do.
I don't think it is an Attack, even if you put in a terrible card, because it effects you as well. I would echo the logic in Something_Smart (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=5611)'s post from last week's contest about giving each player Snow (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20665.msg861678#msg861678), drawing an analogy to using Messenger (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Messenger)'s on-buy effect to give every player a Curse. When it affects the player playing the card the same as everyone else, it's not an attack. So dropping in a Remake (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Remake) would be a huge pain, but it would be a pain for everyone.
It would also be weird mechanically, as the card continues affecting the players throughout the game. If one player played a Moat at the exact moment that happened, would they remain unaffected for the rest of the game, while the other players kept using the Action? How would that be tracked? It seems counter-intuitive.
That being said, the case of a double Remake is a problem, and what I would not want is for a player who is losing to be able to just tank the game and make it so that no one will be able to do anything (or, if they have emptied one Supply pile, that their one Victory card in exile or on a mat will win out after everyone's deck is trashed and they slowly buy out the Curses and Coppers pile). The reason I did not want to do "may play" is that I wanted an option to be playing a harmful card that would hurt you less. But I may have to give that option up to prevent the card from being terrible.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.Also I see no reason for this to stay in play; it can just trash itself upon play.
I took the parenthetical language directly from Hireling, which seems like the most mechanically similar card. Given that the card continues to do something at the start of every turn, it seems both consistent with the other game mechanics and practical for tracking purposes to have a card there.
Also, while I am still mulling over mathdude (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7726)'s suggestion that I limited it to one use per player per game, I certainly do not want there to be more than 10 cards playing each turn, which could be done if you pulled Birthright out of the trash with a Lurker (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Lurker), Graverobber (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Graverobber), or Rogue (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Rogue).
At the start of each player's turn, that player plays the card you set aside.
When you buy this, set aside a non-Duration Action card from the Supply.
(https://i.imgur.com/2qICMZx.png)
Omniscience - $0
Project
Play with your hand and deck entirely face up and visible. You may reorder your deck at any time.
-
When you buy this, gain a Curse if not all players have Omniscience, and another Curse if no other player has Omniscience, then put your deck into your discard pile.
(https://i.imgur.com/S0sfRyM.png)QuoteOmniscience - $0
Project
Play with your hand and deck revealed (ignore on-reveal triggers). You may reorder your deck at any time.
When you buy this: discard your deck, and gain 2 Curses for each opponent that doesn't have Omniscience.
Donate-esque gamechanger, with a penalty for buying it before others. Your deck becomes like a second hand to pick and choose from.
v0.1: (https://i.imgur.com/S0sfRyM.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/xfBBtJK.png)QuoteOmniscience - $0
Project
Play with your hand and deck revealed (ignore on-reveal triggers). You may reorder your deck at any time.
When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile, and gain 2 Curses for each opponent that doesn't have Omniscience.
Donate-esque gamechanger, with a penalty for buying it before others. Your deck becomes like a second hand to pick and choose from.
Coffeehouse - $5
Action
You may discard 2 cards for +4 Cards and +1 Action.
Each other player may discard a card for +1 Card.
-
While this is in play, after a player discards a card, they shuffle their discard pile into their deck.
Old Version
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50930018357_99357c4197_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50930018357_4bc228e8e0_b.jpg)This is nearly strictly better than +3 Cards +1 Action Discard a card as drawing an extra card and topdecking a card is usually something you want and shuffling the discard into the deck is not such a huge drawback.QuoteCoffeehouse - $5
Action
+4 cards
+1 Action
Discard 1 cards. Then, shuffle your discard pile into your deck.
-
While this is in play, after you shuffle your deck, put a card from your hand onto your deck.
A strong Lab variant that can be detrimental if your deck is not ready for it. Not sure how useful/broken this is. Certainly rewards players for trimming down their deck, which is already strong so I am unsure how wise that is. I had a lot of trouble finding inspiration for this challenge. Appreciate any feedback offered.
Fair evaluation, and thanks. Instead of top decking, I originally had the shuffle penalty discarding a card. I also thought of making it a duration with some sort of delayed penalty, but did not continue further. Any thoughts on how shuffling could be made more of a valid penalty?(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50930018357_4bc228e8e0_b.jpg)This is nearly strictly better than +3 Cards +1 Action Discard a card as drawing an extra card and topdecking a card is usually something you want and shuffling the discard into the deck is not such a huge drawback.QuoteCoffeehouse - $5
Action
+4 cards
+1 Action
Discard 1 cards. Then, shuffle your discard pile into your deck.
-
While this is in play, after you shuffle your deck, put a card from your hand onto your deck.
A strong Lab variant that can be detrimental if your deck is not ready for it. Not sure how useful/broken this is. Certainly rewards players for trimming down their deck, which is already strong so I am unsure how wise that is. I had a lot of trouble finding inspiration for this challenge. Appreciate any feedback offered.
But +3 Cards +1 Action Discard a card is better than Forum (it is Lab plus Fugitive whereas Forum is 2 Fugitives).
So the card is overpowered.
That was just a phase. First I phrased things like "this turn," then I thought "no it should be while-in-play," then I worked out that actually I preferred "this turn."
I really like the "discard 1 card, shuffle your discard into your deck" part of the card and would keep it as the core. Making a card a Duration just for the sake of nerfing a card is pretty artificial in my opinion.Fair evaluation, and thanks. Instead of top decking, I originally had the shuffle penalty discarding a card. I also thought of making it a duration with some sort of delayed penalty, but did not continue further. Any thoughts on how shuffling could be made more of a valid penalty?(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/50930018357_4bc228e8e0_b.jpg)This is nearly strictly better than +3 Cards +1 Action Discard a card as drawing an extra card and topdecking a card is usually something you want and shuffling the discard into the deck is not such a huge drawback.QuoteCoffeehouse - $5
Action
+4 cards
+1 Action
Discard 1 cards. Then, shuffle your discard pile into your deck.
-
While this is in play, after you shuffle your deck, put a card from your hand onto your deck.
A strong Lab variant that can be detrimental if your deck is not ready for it. Not sure how useful/broken this is. Certainly rewards players for trimming down their deck, which is already strong so I am unsure how wise that is. I had a lot of trouble finding inspiration for this challenge. Appreciate any feedback offered.
But +3 Cards +1 Action Discard a card is better than Forum (it is Lab plus Fugitive whereas Forum is 2 Fugitives).
So the card is overpowered.
(https://i.imgur.com/FTZa65p.png)
The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
(https://i.imgur.com/FTZa65p.png)
In a two or three player game this is fine. The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player game, no one would want to buy this. In a six player, game, you have to take 10 Curses just to buy the Project, which is insane. I don't think it scales very well. But the idea of the project is really, really, cool.
The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
People who hate Dominion . . . or hate themselves.The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
People who hate Dominion . . . or hate themselves.The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
So true though.People who hate Dominion . . . or hate themselves.The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
(https://i.imgur.com/JE7MBo1m.png)QuoteBirthright - $6regarding the bigger problem of playing 10+ cards at the start of your turn, or double remake, or whatever, you could just have it replace the card on the birthright mat (which gets trashed or returned to the supply or something) - only one card there at a time.
Put a non-Duration Action card from the Supply onto your Birthright mat. At the start of each player's turn for the rest of the game, that player plays the card, leaving it there.
(This stays in play.)
You could also just make it a Project:QuoteAt the start of each player's turn, that player plays the card you set aside.
When you buy this, set aside a non-Duration Action card from the Supply.
Birthright (my Submission) | Legacy (the other card in the split pile) | |
(https://i.imgur.com/QdaZ6yUl.png) | (https://i.imgur.com/RjG40Lvl.png) | |
Quote
| Quote
|
Here is the updated version of my submission, and the bottom half of the 5/5 split pile that goes with it. If permissible, I would like just Birthright to be my submission:
v0.1: (https://i.imgur.com/S0sfRyM.png)
v0.2: (https://i.imgur.com/xfBBtJK.png)
v0.3: (https://i.imgur.com/FTZa65p.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/fbitPZj.png)QuoteOmniscience - $0
Project
Play with your hand and deck entirely face up and visible. You may reorder your deck at any time.
-
When you buy this, gain a Curse if not all players have Omniscience, and another Curse if no other player has Omniscience, then put your deck into your discard pile.
Donate-esque gamechanger, with a penalty for buying it before others. Your deck becomes like a second hand to pick and choose from.
Edits: put into discard pile rather than discard deck; face up and visible rather than revealed to avoid reveal trigger shenanigans. Gaining Curses before putting deck into discard pile for consistency. Re-weighting of Curses to 2 for the Alpha and 1 for each other non-Omega to maintain the 2 Curse cost.
(Somehow the title is not bold, someone knows how that can happen/be fixed?)
I think I found a temporary fix?
Looking through the source file, it seemed to be font file located at this link that were causing the problem:
https://cors-anywhere.herokuapp.com/https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/
I loaded that link in chrome and it had a button to click to give temporary access. Not sure what it means, but I clicked it, it granted temporary access, and now when I reload the generator, the right fonts show up.
(https://i.imgur.com/9vF8zyv.png)
The optional effect can be used to hit price points or if you need a buy. You exchange a short term benefit for a long term penalty (basically -1VP), which is not a trivial decision, I guess.
(Somehow the title is not bold, someone knows how that can happen/be fixed?)
This needs to specify where the Curse is coming from. Based on context, I assume the Supply?
Going to change my entry to this instead:
Armada (Project, $5)
At the start of each of your turns, choose one: put a card from your hand onto your Armada mat, or if you haven’t already done so this game, put all cards on your Armada mat into your hand.
This allows you to build up for one really big turn, but how far are you prepared to push your luck? Maybe someone else will get theirs in first...
If you edit a submission, edit the original post.
I think I would give it a non-zero price to make it a slightly less automatic buy. On most boards, Omniscience itself makes it easy to get rid of the Curses it gives you by lining them up with a trasher, so gaining 2 Curses is not nearly as harsh as it would be on another card.
(https://i.imgur.com/9vF8zyv.png)Some wording changes that I suggest:
For the change of "if you do" see Hunting Lodge.
Yeah, there are many cards that are like that. I just tried to choose the most recent one to show what Donald X's wording is like nowadays.For the change of "if you do" see Hunting Lodge.
Better yet, see Moneylender, which actually changed from "if you do" in the First Edition to "for" in the Second Edition.
My submission for this weeks contest, for now(https://i.imgur.com/7WdK9bs.png)Chessmaster
5$ Action-Command
Reveal any 3 cards from your deck. Discard the Commands and Non-Actions, and play the rest in any order. If you didn't play any cards, +1 Action.
----Shoutout to S_Smarths for wording input on this, this was a pretty messy card before that.
Edit: Timou suggested a new wording, so i wrote his wording instead.
(https://i.imgur.com/zBBNuVL.png)
Edit 2:
People dont seem fond of the chessmaster card, so im changing my submission if thats allowed.
(https://i.imgur.com/41NmfiC.png)
A throne room/ procession variant, that gives you a high amount of control, but trashes both card involved.
Customs Shed
Project $0
When you gain a non-Victory card, you may exile it and another copy of it from the supply.
If you do, you may not discard cards from your exile mat for the rest of the turn.
My internet broke for 2 days which was very annoying but all submissions in the meantime are ok.Quote from: emtzalex link=topic=20676.msg862120#msg862120 date=1No, 613028274Here is the updated version of my submission, and the bottom half of the 5/5 split pile that goes with it. If permissible, I would like just Birthright to be my submission:
I'm not sure I understnad the request. Are you saying you want me to treat this as if it were a 10-card pile of just Birthright? If so, of course that's permissible; I mean, you could have just not posted the fact that it's a split pile. Or do you mean something else?
Going to change my entry to this instead:
Armada (Project, $5)
At the start of each of your turns, choose one: put a card from your hand onto your Armada mat, or if you haven’t already done so this game, put all cards on your Armada mat into your hand.
This allows you to build up for one really big turn, but how far are you prepared to push your luck? Maybe someone else will get theirs in first...
Going to change my entry to this instead:
Armada (Project, $5)
At the start of each of your turns, choose one: put a card from your hand onto your Armada mat, or if you haven’t already done so this game, put all cards on your Armada mat into your hand.
This allows you to build up for one really big turn, but how far are you prepared to push your luck? Maybe someone else will get theirs in first...
What happens after your big turn? Are you required to put a card from your hand onto the mat? Can you choose the second option and have it fail? If it keeps working, players could use it to stash victory cards (or Coppers if they still have them) so they wouldn't be dead weight in their deck.
The contest had a very specific objective, and the card I came up with is Birthright. But I think the optimal number of Birthrights available to a player is more than 1 and fewer than 10, and the only way I can think to do that is with a split pile. A split pile requires a second card, so I made one. But that card exists only to make Birthright better. I think Legacy is a marginal case (at best) for fitting the criteria of requiring a high skill level to play optimally.
The contest had a very specific objective, and the card I came up with is Birthright. But I think the optimal number of Birthrights available to a player is more than 1 and fewer than 10, and the only way I can think to do that is with a split pile. A split pile requires a second card, so I made one. But that card exists only to make Birthright better. I think Legacy is a marginal case (at best) for fitting the criteria of requiring a high skill level to play optimally.
Yeah, that's totally fine. The [Birthright + X splitpile] still qualifies, and my philosophy in general is to only use the theme as en entry barrier. As in, among the cards that qualify, I don't give extra points for being super on theme, but just judge based on how much I like the card.
Cavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you would play an Action card, trash it and play it twice from the Trash, leaving it there.
Cavalcade | Project | $4
When you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
Submission:As phrased currently:
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/u991lknx.png)QuoteCavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you would play an Action card, trash it and play it twice from the Trash, leaving it there.
Maybe not phrased amazingly. Basically adds a Procession that doesn't upgrade in front of every Action. It was the best way I could think to phrase it to make sure the second play doesn't get a second play. Might need a FAQ to clarify. Buying it at the right time is a high-skill ceiling decision, as is understanding when it can be useful.
Cavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
Excellent points, Faust. I am unsure how to succinctly resolve all the ambiguities. I think this helps a little bit:I think this is better. Minor point: You don't need "for the rest of the game", Projects are always implicitly for the rest of the game.
Updated phrasing/submission
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/aqjshwj4.png)QuoteCavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
Regarding the BoM example - I am not sure the Bridge would be trashed, as I think stop-moving applies here. Cavalcade expects played Actions to be in play and can only trash from there I believe.
- Should make it more clear it does not infinitely loop, (a card that is already in the trash cannot successfully be trashed) and you get exactly two plays of the card. (The "if you did" doesn't apply for a third play)
- From my understanding, Band of Misfits would play a Bridge from the supply, leaving it there. Then you have finished playing the Action Bridge, so Bridge gets trashed from the Calvacade and then you play the Bridge again from the trash, leaving it there. Then Band of Misfits is done playing so it gets trashed and you play it again, now with all the cards costing 2 less. In the case of BoM, it may be argued that both BoM and Bridge are finished playing at the same time, so you could theoretically choose which order to Calvacade them. You don't get to choose the order with Golem, which has to wait for the second card to be played before it is finished playing.
- Grave Robber -- first play gain a card from the trash, then it is finished playing so you trash it. Then you play it from the trash and choose to gain itself from the Trash. I think this is consistent. "Leaving it there" isn't a permanent state -- you are allowed to later buy cards from the Supply that you "left there." It just describes what Cavalcade expects but cards can move themselves sometimes to unexpected places.
- Just to point out, Horses basically become triple lab-horses with Cavalcade. This is thematic with the name of the Project. You could load up on a bunch of terminals and a bunch of horses. Then, your horses will provide you all the draw and actions you need to play the other cards.
I am not sure what you mean about the Horses. From what I understand, when you finish playing a Horse it is no longer in play, so it won't be trashed (see Procession) and you won't be able to play it again.That's not quite right. When you play a Horse with Procession, it won't be trashed (it can no longer be moved after being returned), but it WILL be played again.
But the not getting trashed is exactly what I wanted to point out. The "play it again" here refers to Cavalcade, not Procession.I am not sure what you mean about the Horses. From what I understand, when you finish playing a Horse it is no longer in play, so it won't be trashed (see Procession) and you won't be able to play it again.That's not quite right. When you play a Horse with Procession, it won't be trashed (it can no longer be moved after being returned), but it WILL be played again.
I think I would give it a non-zero price to make it a slightly less automatic buy. On most boards, Omniscience itself makes it easy to get rid of the Curses it gives you by lining them up with a trasher, so gaining 2 Curses is not nearly as harsh as it would be on another card.
Not sure I follow; if you play first and automatically buy this in 2 player, taking 2 Curses, while your opponent takes it as soon as convenient for 0 Curses, you're relying heavily on your first player advantage surpassing a concrete disadvantage in a game with zero RNG. I wouldn't expect this to be a winning strategy.
I don't think Donald X. hates Dominion :PPeople who hate Dominion . . . or hate themselves.The problem is, that in a 4, 5, or 6 player gameWho plays Dominion with more than 3?
Cavalcade | Project | $4
When you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
Excellent points, Faust. I am unsure how to succinctly resolve all the ambiguities. I think this helps a little bit:I think this is better. Minor point: You don't need "for the rest of the game", Projects are always implicitly for the rest of the game.
Updated phrasing/submission
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/aqjshwj4.png)QuoteCavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.Regarding the BoM example - I am not sure the Bridge would be trashed, as I think stop-moving applies here. Cavalcade expects played Actions to be in play and can only trash from there I believe.
- Should make it more clear it does not infinitely loop, (a card that is already in the trash cannot successfully be trashed) and you get exactly two plays of the card. (The "if you did" doesn't apply for a third play)
- From my understanding, Band of Misfits would play a Bridge from the supply, leaving it there. Then you have finished playing the Action Bridge, so Bridge gets trashed from the Calvacade and then you play the Bridge again from the trash, leaving it there. Then Band of Misfits is done playing so it gets trashed and you play it again, now with all the cards costing 2 less. In the case of BoM, it may be argued that both BoM and Bridge are finished playing at the same time, so you could theoretically choose which order to Calvacade them. You don't get to choose the order with Golem, which has to wait for the second card to be played before it is finished playing.
- Grave Robber -- first play gain a card from the trash, then it is finished playing so you trash it. Then you play it from the trash and choose to gain itself from the Trash. I think this is consistent. "Leaving it there" isn't a permanent state -- you are allowed to later buy cards from the Supply that you "left there." It just describes what Cavalcade expects but cards can move themselves sometimes to unexpected places.
- Just to point out, Horses basically become triple lab-horses with Cavalcade. This is thematic with the name of the Project. You could load up on a bunch of terminals and a bunch of horses. Then, your horses will provide you all the draw and actions you need to play the other cards.
I am not sure what you mean about the Horses. From what I understand, when you finish playing a Horse it is no longer in play, so it won't be trashed (see Procession) and you won't be able to play it again.
Excellent points, Faust. I am unsure how to succinctly resolve all the ambiguities. I think this helps a little bit:
Updated phrasing/submission
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/aqjshwj4.png)QuoteCavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
Excellent points, Faust. I am unsure how to succinctly resolve all the ambiguities. I think this helps a little bit:
Updated phrasing/submission
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/fvh7e3ls.png)QuoteCavalcade | Project | $4
For the rest of the game, when you finish playing an Action Card, trash it. If you did, play it again from the Trash, leaving it there.
This seems quite similar to Exhaust (v1) to me, as both allow you to replay and trash all your Actions on your last turn. Though Cavalcade is more demanding (and dangerous) as you have to buy it on your penultimate turn already...
Cavalcade could say something like this: „When you play an Action card, play it twice and then trash it“
I think that version would be more similar to Procession and also be clearer than the one in which the throning happens after the trashing.
The Horse issue does IMO illustrate why throning before trashing is more natural.
Cavalcade | Project | $4However; for some reason I like the fact that the way it is currently stated prevents you from re-playing and trashing cards that have moved. There's tracking complexity with trashed-durations already, I don't want to introduce even more tracking complexity with cards that have moved that are played a second-time.
When you play an Action Card, play it again (this second play does not trigger Cavalcade) and then trash it.
Mantle | Action | $0*and then Cavalcade says
Play a card from your hand twice, then trash it
(This is not in the Supply)
Cavalcade | Project | $4Which is really the spirit of the card. But I find the set-aside single-copy of card less elegant. Perhaps this is better because it's clearer and preserves play-then-trash order? I am unsure. In any case, it's too late to change submissions for the contest now, so I'm leaving it as submitted.
During your Action phase, instead of playing cards from your hand, spend Actions (Actions, not Action Cards) to play Mantle.
Set up: Set aside Mantle
v0.1: (https://i.imgur.com/S0sfRyM.png)
v0.2: (https://i.imgur.com/xfBBtJK.png)
v0.3: (https://i.imgur.com/FTZa65p.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/fbitPZj.png)QuoteOmniscience - $0
Project
Play with your hand and deck entirely face up and visible. You may reorder your deck at any time.
-
When you buy this, gain a Curse if not all players have Omniscience, and another Curse if no other player has Omniscience, then put your deck into your discard pile.
Donate-esque gamechanger, with a penalty for buying it before others. Your deck becomes like a second hand to pick and choose from.
Edits: put into discard pile rather than discard deck; face up and visible rather than revealed to avoid reveal trigger shenanigans. Gaining Curses before putting deck into discard pile for consistency. Re-weighting of Curses to 2 for the Alpha and 1 for each other non-Omega to maintain the 2 Curse cost.
The penalty is negated if you have Watchtower in hand. And probably not much of a penalty as long as there is some trashing available.The true penalty of taking two curses is losing tempo against your opponent(s). Heavy trashing isn't necessarily the best way to go, as your deck has infinite consistency without being thin.
The ability to rearrange your entire deck at any time could slow the game down too much... that’s a huge number of decisions you have to make every time you shuffle, and at other times too. Also, “at any time” is bad in general... if you play a Knight can I quickly rearrange my deck at that moment before revealing my top 2 cards? What if you play a Smithy and I want to rearrange my deck after you draw 2 cards but before you draw the third? Not because it could matter but hey, it says I can. Maybe at the least restrict it to your own turn.The ability to rearrange your deck at any time means you just take what you need from it when you interact with it. Yes, Knight attacks can be made to look silly. The "shuffle" consists of laying your discard pile out and taking your desired starting cards. This shouldn't be that time consuming.
Finally, why put your deck into your discard when you buy it? You’re getting a benefit for the whole game, does the one-time minor benefit really matter much?The one time discard benefit is to avoid having your omniscience endgame hampered by the dregs of your last shuffle, which would be annoying and unthematic.
I wonder if the entire thing could be created simplified while keeping the same basic benefit by just allowing you to order your cards when shuffling.This idea actually would take forever, particularly if having to account for milling.
*Edit* Also I’m unclear on what “face up and visible” means for your deck... are the entire deck contents visible, so that the cards have to be spread out? Or is only the top card of your deck visible, meaning that you basically play with your deck turned upside down from normal?Hand and Deck entirely face up and visible: effectively permanently revealed, but avoiding overloading the "revealed" keyword reserved for temporary reveals. Spread out, or in piles; any way that lets players inspect it.
You could simply say "play it twice instead" or "When you play an Action card from your hand, play it again afterwards" (not sure about this, I guess when the card is played again it is already in play so the second time it is not played from hand) or something like that.Cavalcade could say something like this: „When you play an Action card, play it twice and then trash it“
I think that version would be more similar to Procession and also be clearer than the one in which the throning happens after the trashing.
The Horse issue does IMO illustrate why throning before trashing is more natural.
Yeah but the natural reading of "When you play an Action Card, play it twice" means you play each card an infinite number of times because it self-loops. So this phrasing absolutely doesn't work.
You could simply say "play it twice instead" or "When you play an Action card from your hand, play it again afterwards" (not sure about this, I guess when the card is played again it is already in play so the second time it is not played from hand) or something like that.Cavalcade could say something like this: „When you play an Action card, play it twice and then trash it“
I think that version would be more similar to Procession and also be clearer than the one in which the throning happens after the trashing.
The Horse issue does IMO illustrate why throning before trashing is more natural.
Yeah but the natural reading of "When you play an Action Card, play it twice" means you play each card an infinite number of times because it self-loops. So this phrasing absolutely doesn't work.
I don't think that one should (have to) use complex mechanics or a messy wording for a simple and elegant design. While the current wording is perfectly fine and clear, I think that it leads to unnatural play with cards like the aforementioned Horse that isn't, contrary to what you would expect after a quick glance at the Project, not played again.
You could simply say "play it twice instead" or "When you play an Action card from your hand, play it again afterwards" (not sure about this, I guess when the card is played again it is already in play so the second time it is not played from hand) or something like that.Cavalcade could say something like this: „When you play an Action card, play it twice and then trash it“
I think that version would be more similar to Procession and also be clearer than the one in which the throning happens after the trashing.
The Horse issue does IMO illustrate why throning before trashing is more natural.
Yeah but the natural reading of "When you play an Action Card, play it twice" means you play each card an infinite number of times because it self-loops. So this phrasing absolutely doesn't work.
I don't think that one should (have to) use complex mechanics or a messy wording for a simple and elegant design. While the current wording is perfectly fine and clear, I think that it leads to unnatural play with cards like the aforementioned Horse that isn't, contrary to what you would expect after a quick glance at the Project, not played again.
I was trying to come up with a cleaner wording for this project. But as I was working through possible wordings, I realized my wording didn't work with the official Fortress card. Then I went back to the original project, and realized there may not be a way around it. If this project and Fortress are in the same game, as soon as you get one of each, you can draw your full deck - play Fortress, trash it (from project), put it back in your hand (from Fortress below-the-line), repeat until your deck is empty. Does it need to be made slightly more complicated to avoid this problem? Or is this a fringe case we ignore and try to make the wording simple again?
After you play an Action card from your hand, exile it, then play it again from your exile mat, leaving it there. At the beginning of clean up, trash all Action cards on your exile mat.
Given that we have 25 submissions, I decided to have exactly 5 Runner-Ups (among them the Winner), which leaves a lot of good cards that didn't get there.
Final Verdict: #5: Secluded Village by Timinou #4: Jewelry by Carline #3: Armada by mandioca15 #2: Exhaust by alion8me #1: Musketeer by gambit05 |
Decently, but probably somewhat worse than Appraiser (which used to be a Runner-up before I trimmed them).
1: Whats a phantom card?
2: The "gaining a colony from the trash" part of RVR was not definitely not intented. WHy would this be problematic though? outside of Events like salt the earth, im not sure why you trash a colony or province? Though now that im writing this, i suppose that with TfB cards like salvager, apprentice etc, that you could trash a province or colony, get a lot of benefit, and then gain a RVR. Actually, the most broken out of this would probably be a remodel sort of thing: Remodel a province into province, gain a RTR to regain the province.
3: if RTR didnt have this problem, how much better designwise would it bee?
Revolution -- faustThanks for the judging! Just one comment on the highlighted part since that aspect seems to have been lost - the opponent can also just buy out the Ruins in order to block any further VP gains (similar to Triumph with Estates). And if they're clever, they can do so the turn after you've already invested into Revolution.
I'm a bit late to realize that a consequence of this theme is to make judging unusually hard. I'm supposed to know how this plays out, right?
The ceiling here is bonkers. Even if you only get five triggers, you can get more VP than you can get through Victory cards. Exile all of your Aciton Cards after one big turn, and every subsequent 6$ is worth 15VP. On the other hand, if you do nuke your deck, getting to 6$ may not be trivial. The Event does not allow you to leave some of the cards in your deck (although you can choose to discard those from Exile if you gain copies). It's also worth pointing out that you can buy this more than once in a turn.
What optimal play does this incentivize? I'm leaning toward one Mega turn rather than a few value buys. If all the tools are present, you can set up your deck such that you end up with, say, 2 Copper, 2 Silver, a lot of Action cards, and nothing else. Play everything and buy Revolution. Gain a Ruins. Your new deck is Silver, Silver, Copper, Copper, Ruins. Play Ruins, Play Treasures, buy Revolution. Repeat 3 times. Each Revolution gives 1 more VP than the previous one. Your opponent needs to buy 8 provinces to outrace you (rather than 4 or 5), which is not very realistic. Will this be fun? Who knows.
It looks like a good design. It may be a bit too powerful in that it dominates the game most of the time rather than some of the time. I think you tend to want cards that force a very specific strategy to only be used occasionally. On the other hand, executing the Mega turn is certainly a good deal harder than playing something like Rebuild.
This was the last card I kicked out of the Runner-Ups to limit them to five.
The ability to rearrange your deck at any time means you just take what you need from it when you interact with it. Yes, Knight attacks can be made to look silly. The "shuffle" consists of laying your discard pile out and taking your desired starting cards. This shouldn't be that time consuming.QuoteI wonder if the entire thing could be created simplified while keeping the same basic benefit by just allowing you to order your cards when shuffling.This idea actually would take forever, particularly if having to account for milling.