WDC 112: Steal the Show
Design an Attack card that steals from other players.
(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f5/Thief.jpg/200px-Thief.jpg)(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/4/46/Bandit.jpg/200px-Bandit.jpg)
Rules:
- It must have the Attack type, but it doesn't have to be an Action.
- Other players must lose something and you must gain something. You do not have to gain the exact thing they lost - Bandit and Pirate Ship are OK, but Jester is not.
- The effect can be delayed - Rogue is OK.
- The stealing can involve any resource - cards, tokens, turns, VP, etc.
- It's fine if you want to do a split pile or non-supply card , but please cap entries at 2 designed cards max.
Judge's Opinion:
- Don't give players the option to steal from 1 player only. They should steal from everyone (like official cards).
- If I must squint, you have too much text
Ha, that's up to you decide. I put that on there in case someone had a crazy idea, without thinking through what it actually meant. I'll remove the line from the OP, but anyone is welcome to try and answer the question, "How can one steal a turn?"Maybe something more like Possession, but without all the reasons why Possession wouldn't count for this contest?
(https://i.imgur.com/ZIeLYPKh.png) | Quote from: Magic Wardrobe
|
Would Bridge Troll qualify?
- The stealing can involve any resource that persists across turns - cards, tokens, states, etc. Effects that only last a turn (e.g. you get $2) do not count. Effects that go away almost instantly (-1 coin token or Coffers), are discouraged.
- It's fine if you want to do a split pile or non-supply card , but please cap entries at 2 designed cards max.
Judge's Opinion:
- Don't give players the option to steal from 1 player only. They should steal from everyone (like official cards).
- If I must squint, you have too much text
- The rules are loose. You can get away with many designs if they have thieving flavor
Björntjänst
2$ - Action Attack
Each other player reveals the top 3 cards of their deck.
They may trash any of the cards, and if they do, You may gain a copy of them to your hand. They then discard the rest.
Probably a stupid card idea, but i wanted to do a card based on the swedish term "Björntjänst"
(https://i.imgur.com/uUaixpW.png)QuoteBjörntjänst
2$ - Action Attack
Each other player reveals the top 3 cards of their deck.
They may trash any of the cards, and if they do, You may gain a copy of them to your hand. They then discard the rest.
https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/?title=Bj%C3%B6rntj%C3%A4nst&description=Each%20other%20player%20reveals%20the%20top%203%20cards%20of%20their%20deck.%20%0AThey%20may%20trash%20any%20of%20the%20cards%2C%20and%20if%20they%20do%2C%20You%20may%20gain%20a%20copy%20of%20them%20to%20your%20hand.%20They%20then%20discard%20the%20rest.&type=Action%20-%20Attack&credit=%3F%3F%3F&creator=v%201%20fika%20monster&price=%242&preview=&type2=&color2split=1&boldkeys=&picture-x=0&picture-y=-0.38&picture-zoom=1.2&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.bonnier.cloud%2Ffiles%2Fhis%2Fproduction%2F2019%2F10%2F02024719%2Fbjoernetjeneste-7mwmvkiy-tow9eedn5inq.jpg%3Fauto%3Dcompress%26q%3D30%26fit%3Dcrop%26crop%3Dfocalpoint%26fp-x%3D0.5%26fp-y%3D0.5%26w%3D1920%26ixlib%3Dimgixjs-3.4.2&expansion=&custom-icon=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0 (https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/?title=Bj%C3%B6rntj%C3%A4nst&description=Each%20other%20player%20reveals%20the%20top%203%20cards%20of%20their%20deck.%20%0AThey%20may%20trash%20any%20of%20the%20cards%2C%20and%20if%20they%20do%2C%20You%20may%20gain%20a%20copy%20of%20them%20to%20your%20hand.%20They%20then%20discard%20the%20rest.&type=Action%20-%20Attack&credit=%3F%3F%3F&creator=v%201%20fika%20monster&price=%242&preview=&type2=&color2split=1&boldkeys=&picture-x=0&picture-y=-0.38&picture-zoom=1.2&picture=https%3A%2F%2Fimages.bonnier.cloud%2Ffiles%2Fhis%2Fproduction%2F2019%2F10%2F02024719%2Fbjoernetjeneste-7mwmvkiy-tow9eedn5inq.jpg%3Fauto%3Dcompress%26q%3D30%26fit%3Dcrop%26crop%3Dfocalpoint%26fp-x%3D0.5%26fp-y%3D0.5%26w%3D1920%26ixlib%3Dimgixjs-3.4.2&expansion=&custom-icon=&color0=0&color1=0&size=0)
(ink to the card image file, so i can edit this later at another computer
Sheriff • $4 • Action - Attack - Duration
At the start of your next turn, put a card from your discard pile into your hand.
Until then, the first time each other player plays a Treasure other than Copper on their turn, you may discard a card from your hand to steal it.
(https://i.ibb.co/ykDRb5V/image.png) | Goblin Workshop $4 - Action - Attack Each other player reveals top 2 cards from their deck, trashes one costing $3 or $4 and discards the rest. Gain a non-Victory card with the same name as a card in Trash. - Setup: put a Silver to Trash. |
(https://i.imgur.com/6JOlvA7.png) | (https://i.imgur.com/XPOZfFI.png) (https://i.imgur.com/tDzUbDk.png) |
Quote Beguiler - $5 | Quote Hoodwinked |
(https://i.imgur.com/6JOlvA7.png) (https://i.imgur.com/XPOZfFI.png) QuoteBeguiler - $5
Action - Attack - Duration
+$2
Each other player takes Hoodwinked
At the start of your next turn, you may gain to your hand an Action or Treasure from the Trash QuoteHoodwinked
State
The next time you play a non-duration Action or Treasure card: trash it, and gain a different, non-Victory card with the same cost.
Return Hoodwinked
Duration Swindler variant, with the key difference that other players are free to choose their alternative. However, it must be a different card, and non-victory, so most often it will still be unbeneficial. Coppers are still in most circumstances hoodwinked to Curses. Likely, another player will have to trash an engine piece you can make use of.
(https://i.imgur.com/6JOlvA7.png) (https://i.imgur.com/XPOZfFI.png) QuoteBeguiler - $5
Action - Attack - Duration
+$2
Each other player takes Hoodwinked
At the start of your next turn, you may gain to your hand an Action or Treasure from the Trash QuoteHoodwinked
State
The next time you play a non-duration Action or Treasure card: trash it, and gain a different, non-Victory card with the same cost.
Return Hoodwinked
Duration Swindler variant, with the key difference that other players are free to choose their alternative. However, it must be a different card, and non-victory, so most often it will still be unbeneficial. Coppers are still in most circumstances hoodwinked to Curses. Likely, another player will have to trash an engine piece you can make use of.
I just realized that this would make Prince completely useless
I think the better solution is to just not use Prince or Reap on Beguiler boards. I think it's fine to allow those interactions. It's not any more broken than Swindling Province->Peddler or Province->Prince.
SiegeSimilar to Thief in that it directly steals trashed cards, but unlike Thief, it is not restricted to Treasures, but instead digs for a specific cost range. It has a nice interaction with cost reduction, which lets you steal more expensive cards. The cost includes debt in order to ensure that a Siege can't steal another Siege, even with cost reduction
Action - Attack
Cost: $4 1D
Each other player reveals cards from their deck until revealing one costing $3 or $4, trashing that card and discarding the rest. You may gain any or all of the trashed cards
I think the better solution is to just not use Prince or Reap on Beguiler boards. I think it's fine to allow those interactions. It's not any more broken than Swindling Province->Peddler or Province->Prince.
I think the better solution is to just not use Prince or Reap on Beguiler boards. I think it's fine to allow those interactions. It's not any more broken than Swindling Province->Peddler or Province->Prince.
I agree that unfun one-off interactions don't ruin a card, but I think the change is an improvement, and covers enough cases to be worth the additional text.
For example, letting Captain get a supply card trashed for a free gain is another amusing case best avoided. But letting these cards provide an opportunity to trash your terminals without killing your turn is a nice interaction.
I agree that unfun one-off interactions don't ruin a card, but I think the change is an improvement, and covers enough cases to be worth the additional text.
For example, letting Captain get a supply card trashed for a free gain is another amusing case best avoided. But letting these cards provide an opportunity to trash your terminals without killing your turn is a nice interaction.
I don't think Captain would've worked that way anyways with the old version, since Captain specifically says to leave it in place. Wouldn't the stop-moving rule apply here? Beguiler expects to find the card in play, but it's not, so it can't trash it, same as, for example, Counterfeiting a Spoils or Processioning a Horse
On the other hand, either version would be a lot of fun with Fortress. Play Fortress, it gets trashed, going back to your hand, you get a free $4 card, and you get to play that same Fortress again!
Bodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may trash this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, gain to your hand an Action card from the trash.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128454884_9ba956e364_b.jpg)QuoteBodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may reveal this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, if it is in the trash, exchange this for it.
A one shot Reaction that steals an Action card. Otherwise, it is a slow Night card that gives you a Coffer and a Boon. It may be overpriced, but I was worried about making a card that can steal any cost of Action card too cheap. It will have an interesting effect on boards that have very appealing expensive Action cards as stealing one would be a pretty big swing. I appreciate any feedback or criticism.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128454884_9ba956e364_b.jpg)QuoteBodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may reveal this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, if it is in the trash, exchange this for it.
A one shot Reaction that steals an Action card. Otherwise, it is a slow Night card that gives you a Coffer and a Boon. It may be overpriced, but I was worried about making a card that can steal any cost of Action card too cheap. It will have an interesting effect on boards that have very appealing expensive Action cards as stealing one would be a pretty big swing. I appreciate any feedback or criticism.
I'm not sure the "exchange" keyword really works in that context, since you're not gaining the card from the Supply, but rather, from the trash, so to get that intended effect, you might need to say "Return this to its pile to gain the trashed card". You also probably don't need the "if it is in the trash" part. Even if you tried to use it on a Fortress, the only case where the "if it is in the trash" part would fail, it still wouldn't be able to gain it, since it wouldn't be where it expected to find it (in fact, at that point, it wouldn't even be in play any more, it would be in your opponent's hand again)
Also, I'm not convinced you really need the above-the-line part. This could work as a pure reaction (well, Reaction - Attack, but only those two types)
However, overall, the card seems pretty good to me
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128457976_f42ef150dc_b.jpg)QuoteBodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may trash this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, gain to your hand an Action card from the trash.
A one shot Reaction that steals an Action card. Otherwise, it is a slow Night card that gives you a Coffer and a Boon. It may be overpriced, but I was worried about making a card that can steal any cost of Action card too cheap. It will have an interesting effect on boards that have very appealing expensive Action cards as stealing one would be a pretty big swing. I appreciate any feedback or criticism.
Edit: Changed the below line text to not use the exchange wording.
Old Version
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128454884_9ba956e364_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128457976_f42ef150dc_b.jpg)QuoteBodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may trash this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, gain to your hand an Action card from the trash.
A one shot Reaction that steals an Action card. Otherwise, it is a slow Night card that gives you a Coffer and a Boon. It may be overpriced, but I was worried about making a card that can steal any cost of Action card too cheap. It will have an interesting effect on boards that have very appealing expensive Action cards as stealing one would be a pretty big swing. I appreciate any feedback or criticism.
Edit: Changed the below line text to not use the exchange wording.
Old Version
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128454884_9ba956e364_b.jpg)
This doesn't really work as an Attack type, since cards that care about Attacks care when an Attack is played, and Attack cards attack when played. This attacks when you react with it, not when you play it. It shouldn't have the Attack type for the same reason Ill-Gotten Gains doesn't have the Attack type.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128457976_f42ef150dc_b.jpg)QuoteBodysnatcher - $4
Night - Attack - Reaction - Fate
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn.
----
After another player plays a non-Duration Action card, you may trash this from your hand, to trash that card. Then, gain to your hand an Action card from the trash.
A one shot Reaction that steals an Action card. Otherwise, it is a slow Night card that gives you a Coffer and a Boon. It may be overpriced, but I was worried about making a card that can steal any cost of Action card too cheap. It will have an interesting effect on boards that have very appealing expensive Action cards as stealing one would be a pretty big swing. I appreciate any feedback or criticism.
Edit: Changed the below line text to not use the exchange wording.
Old Version
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51128454884_9ba956e364_b.jpg)
This doesn't really work as an Attack type, since cards that care about Attacks care when an Attack is played, and Attack cards attack when played. This attacks when you react with it, not when you play it. It shouldn't have the Attack type for the same reason Ill-Gotten Gains doesn't have the Attack type.
+1 Coffers
Take a Boon. Receive it now or at the start of your next turn. If it is not your turn, trash this and a non-Duration Action card in play. Then, gain an Action card to your hand from the trash
-
When another person plays a non-Duration Action card, you may play this from your hand
Hmm, that is true. I guess my entry is invalid as designed. Very well, I will mark it as such.
Edit: Just noticed that stealing from only one person is also not a valid design, so this goes against that criteria.
Does this 2-card max include any non-card entities, like states or markers?Yep. Please don't design more than 2 components.
Are you sure about the 'has to have the attack type' criterion? You didn't say that you have to steal something valuable, so technically, a card that steals in a non-attack way but attacks in an unrelated manner would pass. This doesn't seem ideal.I think it's fine.
Does this 2-card max include any non-card entities, like states or markers?Yep. Please don't design more than 2 components.
Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/uhsm.png)
maybe it's a litle bit on the weak side; don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
Wrangler - Action Attack, $5 cost.Steal Horses, or give them out with Curses to those with none.
+2 Cards
Each other player returns a Horse from their hand to its pile (or reveals they can't). Gain 2 Horses if anyone did. Those who did draw a card; those who didn't gain a Curse and a Horse.
I think we can do anything while we follow the rules and give cards to other isn't explicitly forbiden...Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:
...
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
Would this qualify? Your opponents are losing cards, but they're also gaining cards, and likewise, you're both gaining and getting rid of cards, so in the end you're just redistributing cards, like Masquerade on steroids
The variable cost is quite an interesting twist
It's a cool idea; have you any issue about the card generator or you just don't want to make it a card?QuoteWrangler - Action Attack, $5 cost.Steal Horses, or give them out with Curses to those with none.
+2 Cards
Each other player returns a Horse from their hand to its pile (or reveals they can't). Gain 2 Horses if anyone did. Those who did draw a card; those who didn't gain a Curse and a Horse.
Are you sure about the 'has to have the attack type' criterion? You didn't say that you have to steal something valuable, so technically, a card that steals in a non-attack way but attacks in an unrelated manner would pass. This doesn't seem ideal.I think it's fine.
new card submission
(https://i.imgur.com/YLDteHN.png)
Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
(Edited)
Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
(Edited)
Would this qualify? Your opponents are losing cards, but they're also gaining cards, and likewise, you're both gaining and getting rid of cards, so in the end you're just redistributing cards, like Masquerade on steroids
The variable cost is quite an interesting twist
Passing two cards can be harsh and it could be particularly brutal if played after a handsize attack.
QuoteWrangler - Action Attack, $5 cost.Steal Horses, or give them out with Curses to those with none.
+2 Cards
Each other player returns a Horse from their hand to its pile (or reveals they can't). Gain 2 Horses if anyone did. Those who did draw a card; those who didn't gain a Curse and a Horse.
- Other players must lose something that persists across multiple turns and you must gain something that persists across multiple turns. You do not have to gain the exact thing they lost - Bandit and Pirate Ship are OK, but Jester is not.
I don't think your card meets the criteria that you "must gain something". If no one returns a Horse, then you do not gain anything.
new card submission
(https://i.imgur.com/YLDteHN.png)
Could playing a Night card during your Action phase have any unintended consequences?
I don't think your card meets the criteria that you "must gain something". If no one returns a Horse, then you do not gain anything.
If this is true, then Thief wouldn't be eligible either, although it was shown in the original post, just below the title.
Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:I don’t get the point of the variable cost. Is this really stronger in 3P?
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
(Edited)
Sack | Action - Attack | $4
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest. If a card was trashed this way, trash this and choose a card trashed by this to gain a horse per $1 it costs.
$2 - Treasure
$1
+1 Buy
-
While this is in play, when you gain a card costing $3 or less, you may gain a copy of it.
$5 - Night-Attack
Each other player reveals the top 3 cards of their deck and trashes a card costing up to $3 that you choose. Choose one: gain a card costing up to $3 per Clutter you have in play; or gain a card from the trash.
new card submission
(https://i.imgur.com/YLDteHN.png)
"Exile one copy of any trashed cards" needs clarification. Are you Exiling the actual card from the Trash? Are you Exiling a copy of it from the Supply (if there are any left)? Is the "one copy" meant to say that if there are 3 Estates you only get 1? Or is "one copy" meant to help clarify my earlier question, that it's actually a copy from the Supply rather than the actual card from the Trash - in which case, you should probably say "a copy"?
I think +2 Cards, and a forced trash for all other players (which, granted, may sometimes help them, but later in the game may also be quite harmful) with the option to Exile is probably already strong enough for $4. I don't think it needs to let you play the Exiled card (let alone twice!) That option for playing the card makes it very swingy and situational.
As with similar attacks, this can get very powerful in multi-player games (e.g. Pirate Ship more likely to succeed, Thief getting more cards), but that's part of the game. But imagine someone having to choose between trashing a Silver or Duchy near the end of the game? They either give you $4 this turn, or a swing of 6 points (they trash 3 points, you Exile 3 points). If you do want to allow playing the Exiled card, I think once is plenty, and even then may require the card to go up to $5 instead of $4.
On another note - with Emulators (such as Command-type), they generally do not allow the play of Duration cards, for tracking issues. I think that would be wise to include here, if you keep the option to play the Exiled card. Especially tracking if Duration cards can be played twice would become troublesome if more than one were played (in 3+ player games), as the Throne Room (or variant) is usually set aside with it, but you can't easily do this with multiple cards.Could playing a Night card during your Action phase have any unintended consequences?
Aside from the fact that I don't think this card needs to even Play cards that were Exiled, yes, I think there could be some consequences. Looking through the official Night cards - if we remove the ability to play Duration cards, I think that fixes some of the issues. Here are my comments on how they are all effected:
- Guardian - not too bad, but just need to remember that even when in Exile, is it played or just in Exile?
- Monastery - in most cases, this would serve no purpose when played at this time
- Changeling - this will usually not allow you to gain a copy of a Treasure anymore by playing it this way, but that's the way it is
- Ghost Town, Cobbler, Den of Sin, Ghost - the only concern is tracking that these have been played, but remains in Exile instead of in Play
- Night Watchman - this card may actually be stronger by allowing it to be played with Spoiled Heir
- Devil's Workshop - this card is definitely stronger, as it will usually allow you to gain a Gold, then later you can still Buy a card this turn (normally, you have to choose not to Buy a card in order to gain the Gold)
- Exorcist, Bat - functionally, I don't think these card are much different if played now in the Action phase instead of the Night phase, unless Fortress is in the Kingdom
- Crypt - this card is practically useless when played in your Action phase, unless Storyteller or Black Market are in the Kingdom and even then it's weak
- Vampire - in general, this probably doesn't affect much, unless you can still draw cards and have a near-empty Deck, then drawing the card you just gained with Vampire can be quite powerful, as well as possibly being able to draw your newly Exchanged Bat and getting it back to a Vampire the same turn
- Werewolf - would you get a choice between playing the Action-ability or the Night-ability, since you can play either Type with Spoiled Heir, or would it default to only getting the +3 Cards since it is technically the Action phase?
- Raider - this would force other players to Discard one of the Action cards you have in play, rather than potentially having an option to discard only a Copper if you would have played one of those (alternatively, it also doesn't give you the option of only playing Silver and Gold and hoping people have to discard one of those or a Raider)
As worded, Clutter lets you gain the entire Village pile, since it both triggers on-gain and causes gaining.
As worded, Clutter lets you gain the entire Village pile, since it both triggers on-gain and causes gaining.
Or any $3 or less pile. If you have two of those in play (or just one with some other +buy) with just $5 to spend, you can instantly three pile the game by buying, say, a Silver, a Copper, and an Estate, since you'd gain those entire piles
The obvious fix is to change it to "when you buy", but you could also potentially do something like "When you gain a card costing $3 or less other than with this ..." similar to how Sewer avoids mass-trashing
Masterwork • $4 • Treasure - Attack
+$4
Each other player with 5 or more cards in hand discards a Treasure (or reveals they can't).
The player to your left may discard 2 more cards from their hand to gain this from you.
new card submission
(https://i.imgur.com/YLDteHN.png)
Edit: Removed the "play the exiled card" thing to make the card read simplier, and i think i clarafied that you exile the trashed cards.
(https://i.imgur.com/2R2yNcQ.png)
Ok, I get it. I get it.This wording can still drain the entire Experiment pile. Which granted, is not quite as big a problem, but worth keeping in mind.
When I'm next at a computer instead of on my phone, I'll change it to "when you gain a card costing $3 or less other than with Clutter..."
I don't want an on-buy effect because I want it to be able to trigger with a cheap gain from Cleaning. And "other than with this" wouldn't work if you have 2 Clutters in play, since the gain from one would trigger the other
(https://i.imgur.com/3mQSdbY.png)
Ok, I get it. I get it.This wording can still drain the entire Experiment pile. Which granted, is not quite as big a problem, but worth keeping in mind.
When I'm next at a computer instead of on my phone, I'll change it to "when you gain a card costing $3 or less other than with Clutter..."
I don't want an on-buy effect because I want it to be able to trigger with a cheap gain from Cleaning. And "other than with this" wouldn't work if you have 2 Clutters in play, since the gain from one would trigger the other
I'm more generally worried about the power level of these cards. Clutter seems better than Talisman, a $4 cost, a lot of the time. I feel like even without the while-in-play effect, it would still be a decently strong (if boring) $2. Cleaning's blanket "gain a card from the trash" can be insane, especially since it's a Night, so you can go Salt the Earth - Cleaning. There's a reason that Rogue has a restriction.
Clutter is probably fine at $3. I think Cleaning needs to say "gain a card trashed by this from the trash", as gaining by default is from the supply. And if you argue that this can implicitly gain cards from elsewhere, you might end up in a situation where you're able to gain a Fortress from your opponent's hand.
you have more choice about wich card you could keep so it's strictly better at 3P than at 2PGlad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:I don’t get the point of the variable cost. Is this really stronger in 3P?
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
(Edited)
Yes, there is still some problem with this card, but the handsize thing is probably a good way to nerf it.Glad that I've already made a card with this type of effect:
<Carnival>
Don't hesitate to told me what you think about it.
(Edited)
With the similarities to Masquerade, using the Pass mechanic, I don't know if this would actually be an Attack card. I guess where Masquerade (if an Attack) could be almost useless/redundant if people use a Moat, this card does make sense to protect against with a Moat, so maybe it's okay.Would this qualify? Your opponents are losing cards, but they're also gaining cards, and likewise, you're both gaining and getting rid of cards, so in the end you're just redistributing cards, like Masquerade on steroids
The variable cost is quite an interesting twist
I know I'm not judging. But it seems to me that even if your/their cards are all "replaced", there is still the concept of "steal" and "gain" here.Passing two cards can be harsh and it could be particularly brutal if played after a handsize attack.
I agree. There probably needs to be a restriction on who it affects - maybe "Each other player with 4 or more cards..."? You could put it at 5, but Legionary already sets a precedent for a player's cards temporarily going down to 2, so I think 4 is okay.
My own additional comment... I think this card borders on a political attack. Yes, it's attacking everyone. But the option to give one person 2 Curses and a different person 2 Coppers does allow for directed attacks. Any time that cards allow for a non-random effect that can harm/hurt a single player, it specifically deals with the person to the Left (or Right), rather than allowing a choice.
Corrupt Official - $5
Action - Attack
+3 Cards
Each player with 4 or more cards in hand Exiles a card from their hand.
You may trash this to have each other player pass to your hand, from their Exile, a non-Victory card of your choice.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51133201385_8fe6a9b855_b.jpg)QuoteCorrupt Official - $4
Action - Attack
+3 Cards
Each player with 4 or more cards in hand Exiles a card from their hand.
You may trash this to have each other player pass to your hand, from their Exile, a non-Victory card of your choice.
Ok, second attempt. This is a quasi hand-size attack that can be beneficial to everyone as it allows players to exile junk from their deck. Later on it can be trashed to steal non-victory cards from other players exile area for a payload. I am not sure about the wording for the stealing part, but I used Masquerade as a framework for it. The scaling will be a bit strange for it when it comes to the number of players as the payload will be bigger with more players, but the likelihood of getting a large number of copper junking your deck is greater. I did have it only draw 2 card for a while but figured that, between allowing everyone to exile cards and the stealing ability being pretty tame, making it a Smithy variant would make it more appealing. Feedback is appreciated.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51133201385_8fe6a9b855_b.jpg)QuoteCorrupt Official - $4
Action - Attack
+3 Cards
Each player with 4 or more cards in hand Exiles a card from their hand.
You may trash this to have each other player pass to your hand, from their Exile, a non-Victory card of your choice.
Ok, second attempt. This is a quasi hand-size attack that can be beneficial to everyone as it allows players to exile junk from their deck. Later on it can be trashed to steal non-victory cards from other players exile area for a payload. I am not sure about the wording for the stealing part, but I used Masquerade as a framework for it. The scaling will be a bit strange for it when it comes to the number of players as the payload will be bigger with more players, but the likelihood of getting a large number of copper junking your deck is greater. I did have it only draw 2 card for a while but figured that, between allowing everyone to exile cards and the stealing ability being pretty tame, making it a Smithy variant would make it more appealing. Feedback is appreciated.
At +3 cards, I think it needs to cost $5. The exiling can be positive or negative so let's call it neutral. But the same way mining village costs more than village, the additional trash ability means this has to cost more than smithy, I think. Scaling is a bit of an issue, but not too bad I think. Otherwise, I think this is a good use of both Exile and the Pass mechanic, combined into an attack.
(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
Or you play rational, keep the good stuff, pass the worst junk to whoever leads and the other stuff to the other dudes and dudettes.(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
This is an interesting, creative concept; however, the card seems rather political in a very un-Dominion-like way: players pass you cards, then you give the Curses to the players you hate and the Silvers to the ones you like.
Would that every game player, in every game, were as enlightened as you, segura – the world would be a much better place. As it is though, Dominion is intended to be as non-political as possible. Just read anything Donald X. has said on the subject. Interactive is awesome; political is not. Carnival is political. Every official card ever made is not. (Or as the master would say: “There are players who like to pick who to hose and, well, there are games out there that cater to them.”)Or you play rational, keep the good stuff, pass the worst junk to whoever leads and the other stuff to the other dudes and dudettes.(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
This is an interesting, creative concept; however, the card seems rather political in a very un-Dominion-like way: players pass you cards, then you give the Curses to the players you hate and the Silvers to the ones you like.
I don't see the issue. An interactive card that makes the game less solitaire-ish, makes you want to memorize hard who leads and enables you to hit whoever leads (to a very mild degree) is more of an asset than a liability.
I am aware of DXV's distaste for "political" games. I never got that term. The games I like least are solitaire-ish, the games I like moderately are indirectly interactive (like Dominion, although I obviously like Dominion quite a lot) and the games I like most are highly interactive (when you feel like you are playing the players and not the game).Would that every game player, in every game, were as enlightened as you, segura – the world would be a much better place. As it is though, Dominion is intended to be as non-political as possible. Just read anything Donald X. has said on the subject. Interactive is awesome; political is not. Carnival is political. Every official card ever made is not. (Or as the master would say: “There are players who like to pick who to hose and, well, there are games out there that cater to them.”)Or you play rational, keep the good stuff, pass the worst junk to whoever leads and the other stuff to the other dudes and dudettes.(https://www.zupimages.net/up/21/16/hgqd.png)
This is an interesting, creative concept; however, the card seems rather political in a very un-Dominion-like way: players pass you cards, then you give the Curses to the players you hate and the Silvers to the ones you like.
I don't see the issue. An interactive card that makes the game less solitaire-ish, makes you want to memorize hard who leads and enables you to hit whoever leads (to a very mild degree) is more of an asset than a liability.
Lupin
cost $4 - Action - Attack
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. You play one of the trashed Treasure, leaving there; each time that would give you +$ this turn, you get +Coffer instead.
A thief you want to play early. Instead of junking your deck, you get one-shot Coffer immediately. Use it to earn $5 or $8!
Thieves Den | Project | $5
When any other player gains a Victory card in their turn, they take Burglarized. When they return Burglarized, you may gain a non-Victory card from the trash.
Burglarized | State
At the end of your turn, reveal the top 2 cards of your deck, trash one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discard the rest. Return this.
UPDATED SUBMISSION - completely new
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/thievesden.png)
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/burglarized.png)QuoteThieves Den | Project | $5
When any other player gains a Victory card in their turn, they take Burglarized. When they return Burglarized, you may gain a non-Victory card from the trash.QuoteBurglarized | State
At the end of your turn, reveal the top 2 cards of your deck, trash one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discard the rest. Return this.
One of the problems with deck trashers is that it can be unfair. I trash your first $5 card before you get to play it, bad luck. So, what if we delayed trashing, so it triggers in the endgame? Then it will be a lot less swingy! Once you buy Burglarized, in a two-player game, whenever your opponent gains a victory card on their turn you basically get to Knight-attack them and steal a non-victory card they trashed. (Stealing a duchy is too brutal, that's the main impetus for the Victory card gaining restriction). When there's more than two players, the trashing attack doesn't stack (that's the reason for the State), but each player with Thieves Den gets to pick from the trash, in turn order after the current player's turn. The State makes it not scale too powerful with 2+ players. The state also makes it guarantee to hit (unless you have a golden deck) since it triggers after you have drawn up to 5 cards and your deck/discard can't be empty.
The presence of this Project on the table might make you build a little longer than usual. Even if your opponent never buys it, you have to worry about them buying it. In a single gain board if you rush into Provinces too quickly, your deck can be burglarized away, yikes!
Of course, in the endgame, those extra cards might not help you too much. Or maybe they will. This is definitely one of those projects that won't always be bought. It's price point is rather expensive but I think compares with Road Network decently.
Open to feedback. I originally had the "in their turn" clause to prevent you from attacking opponents by gifting them estates with messenger/ambassador/etc, but perhaps it is not necessary.
Lupin
cost $4 - Action - Attack
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. You play one of the trashed Treasure, leaving there; each time that would give you +$ this turn, you get +Coffer instead.
A thief you want to play early. Instead of junking your deck, you get one-shot Coffer immediately. Use it to earn $5 or $8!
This seems a lot better than Pirate Ship. You can trash an opponent's Platinum and get +5 Coffers during the same turn that you attack, which is amazing. Or you could trash an opponent's Bank after having a bunch of Treasures in play with Storyteller or Black Market and potentially get a lot more Coffers.
Ambush $5 – Action - Attack Quote
| Purse $3* – Treasure Quote
|
UPDATED SUBMISSION - completely new
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/thievesden.png)
(https://files.coding4.coffee/selif/burglarized.png)QuoteThieves Den | Project | $5
When any other player gains a Victory card in their turn, they take Burglarized. When they return Burglarized, you may gain a non-Victory card from the trash.QuoteBurglarized | State
At the end of your turn, reveal the top 2 cards of your deck, trash one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discard the rest. Return this.
One of the problems with deck trashers is that it can be unfair. I trash your first $5 card before you get to play it, bad luck. So, what if we delayed trashing, so it triggers in the endgame? Then it will be a lot less swingy! Once you buy Burglarized, in a two-player game, whenever your opponent gains a victory card on their turn you basically get to Knight-attack them and steal a non-victory card they trashed. (Stealing a duchy is too brutal, that's the main impetus for the Victory card gaining restriction). When there's more than two players, the trashing attack doesn't stack (that's the reason for the State), but each player with Thieves Den gets to pick from the trash, in turn order after the current player's turn. The State makes it not scale too powerful with 2+ players. The state also makes it guarantee to hit (unless you have a golden deck) since it triggers after you have drawn up to 5 cards and your deck/discard can't be empty.
The presence of this Project on the table might make you build a little longer than usual. Even if your opponent never buys it, you have to worry about them buying it. In a single gain board if you rush into Provinces too quickly, your deck can be burglarized away, yikes!
Of course, in the endgame, those extra cards might not help you too much. Or maybe they will. This is definitely one of those projects that won't always be bought. It's price point is rather expensive but I think compares with Road Network decently.
Open to feedback. I originally had the "in their turn" clause to prevent you from attacking opponents by gifting them estates with messenger/ambassador/etc, but perhaps it is not necessary.
This could be quite painful. And nearly impossible to avoid. Un-moatable since it's not an Attack. It happens after Clean-up, so you can't just top-deck a Silver or something similar, makes cost-reduction much more risky, since any cost-reduction in play when you buy a Victory card is still going to be in play when the State triggers. Two highways in play creates the risk of losing a Province to Burglarized. As far as I can tell, the only way to reduce the danger is to make sure your deck has lots of cheap cantrips
EDIT: Also, I'm pretty sure this doesn't qualify. The contest rules specified that it has to have the Attack type
The rules are going to be somewhat loose
Lupin
cost $4 - Action - Attack
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. You play one of the trashed Treasure, leaving there; each time that would give you +$ this turn, you get +Coffer instead.
A thief you want to play early. Instead of junking your deck, you get one-shot Coffer immediately. Use it to earn $5 or $8!
This seems a lot better than Pirate Ship. You can trash an opponent's Platinum and get +5 Coffers during the same turn that you attack, which is amazing. Or you could trash an opponent's Bank after having a bunch of Treasures in play with Storyteller or Black Market and potentially get a lot more Coffers.
Who buys Platinum or Bank in games using Lupin? In most games, the best Treasure is Gold. Pirate Ship can earn $5 each time (after playing 5 times), but Lupin can't.
(https://i.ibb.co/7p6f2xF/Extortionist.png)
I believe the wording is necessary to stop you from gaining cards form weird places (like your opponent's hand)
(https://i.ibb.co/7p6f2xF/Extortionist.png)
I believe the wording is necessary to stop you from gaining cards form weird places (like your opponent's hand)
I think the stop-moving rule would apply without that wording, e.g., you trash a Fortress, it goes back into your opponent's hand, Extortionist expects to find it in the trash, and since it doesn't find it there it can't gain it. But I could be wrong
Dark Knight - Action-Attack, $5
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest. If they trashed a card costing $5 or more, they get +2 Coffers. You may gain one of the trashed cards other than a Dark Knight.
Dark Knight - Action-Attack, $5
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest. If they trashed a card costing $5 or more, they get +1 Coffers. You may gain one of the trashed cards.
That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.
That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.Rogue alone can also steal a card from an opponent if you play it twice. But unlike Dark Knight, Rogue also gives a +$2 vanilla bonus. So two plays of Rogue roughly equal one play of Dark Knight (minus the Coffers recompensation) plus one play of a terminal +$4 Action card, which on its own would be strictly better than Harvest and probably a reasonable $5 card.
That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.
And a Dark Knight can steal other Dark Knights, which could easily snowball
I don't think this is a useful way of analysing cards. The reason you get Rogue is (most of the time) for the attack, and if possible you'd rather have more attacking than more vanilla stuff. As a simpler comparison, consider Witch. Two Witches are equal to one play of Hunting Grounds (a $6) and a card that just says "Each other player gains 2 Curses".That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.Rogue alone can also steal a card from an opponent if you play it twice. But unlike Dark Knight, Rogue also gives a +$2 vanilla bonus. So two plays of Rogue roughly equal one play of Dark Knight (minus the Coffers recompensation) plus one play of a terminal +$4 Action card, which on its own would be strictly better than Harvest and probably a reasonable $5 card.
Rogue and Knights have mitigating factors. The Knights kill off each other and Rogue oscillates between a trashing Attack and gaining. If you combine a trashing Attack with gaining this is simply too strong. Some Coffers for the opponents do not compensate for total deck annihilation.That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.Rogue alone can also steal a card from an opponent if you play it twice. But unlike Dark Knight, Rogue also gives a +$2 vanilla bonus. So two plays of Rogue roughly equal one play of Dark Knight (minus the Coffers recompensation) plus one play of a terminal +$4 Action card, which on its own would be strictly better than Harvest and probably a reasonable $5 card.
I've considered increasing the recompensation for losing a $5+ card to 2 Coffers, so the attacked player could easily rebuy the lost card on their next turn. But I'm not sure it's necessary, as Rogue and Knight are also fine without any recompensation.
Rogue and Knights have mitigating factors. The Knights kill off each other and Rogue oscillates between a trashing Attack and gaining. If you combine a trashing Attack with gaining this is simply too strong. Some Coffers for the opponents do not compensate for total deck annihilation.That is far too harsh, it is like Knight and Rogue combined without any mitigating factors like Knights slaughtering each other.Rogue alone can also steal a card from an opponent if you play it twice. But unlike Dark Knight, Rogue also gives a +$2 vanilla bonus. So two plays of Rogue roughly equal one play of Dark Knight (minus the Coffers recompensation) plus one play of a terminal +$4 Action card, which on its own would be strictly better than Harvest and probably a reasonable $5 card.
I've considered increasing the recompensation for losing a $5+ card to 2 Coffers, so the attacked player could easily rebuy the lost card on their next turn. But I'm not sure it's necessary, as Rogue and Knight are also fine without any recompensation.
It is not like this is new or controversial, we know since Intrigue (Saboteur had the anti-Remodel-ing as mitigating element) how super nasty trashing Attacks are. Your attack would be likely be too harsh even without the gaining (makes it more or less a Dame Josephine).
But for evaluating the strength of a card, I would mainly consider the non-mirror
I'm assuming this version [of Excorcist] still gains the trashed card.
Clutter/Cleaning by mathdude
Clutter obviously compares to Talisman. Talisman is already weak, and I think Talisman has a better wording, but I like how Clutter cost $3 and can gain victory cards too. Cleaning is interesting. If I understand correctly, it gains a single card of N price, and not N cards costing up to $3. This means you can gain Provinces and such, which is cool. The attack is reasonably balanced, but man, everything just insists on there being lots of good $3 and under cards, and I don't see enough games having those.
Let me know what the multiplayer issues were with Beguiler/Hoodwinked.Imagine a 3 player game where one player never buys Beguiler. The player to their right can play 2 Beguilers and gain 2 cards from the trash each turn. If they do, the other Beguiler player can gain only 1 from the trash, no matter how many Beguilers they play. Essentially one player gets to double-dip, all because of turn order.
Ambush/Purse by gambit05
Purse is a sweet design, and I like the idea of gaining and attacking the purses of others, but it's too swingy in the current form. If someone kills your Purse early, you're losing $2 and a trash that turn. That's too devastating for something out of your control.
As far as I can see it, at least 2 players have to hit $5 to gain an Ambush (despite the fact that early on, other $5 cost cards easily have a higher priority), then at least the player who will be at the receiving end later, had to play their Ambush in order to gain a Purse, and that Purse has to cycle through the deck to be in that players hand, and at the same time another player has to play an Ambush. In the mean time, quite a lot has happened to the players decks. To me that looks like most official Attack cards are too swingy and devastating then.By early I meant having your first Purse trashed before you can even play it, which seemed frustrating. My real critique though was the attack either does nothing, or does something very strong, but there isn't much middle ground. If it could hit other stuff, such as Silver, then I would be much more on-board.
As far as I can see it, at least 2 players have to hit $5 to gain an Ambush (despite the fact that early on, other $5 cost cards easily have a higher priority), then at least the player who will be at the receiving end later, had to play their Ambush in order to gain a Purse, and that Purse has to cycle through the deck to be in that players hand, and at the same time another player has to play an Ambush. In the mean time, quite a lot has happened to the players decks. To me that looks like most official Attack cards are too swingy and devastating then.By early I meant having your first Purse trashed before you can even play it, which seemed frustrating. My real critique though was the attack either does nothing, or does something very strong, but there isn't much middle ground. If it could hit other stuff, such as Silver, then I would be much more on-board.
I did like your cards BTW.