(https://i.imgur.com/sHmplyb.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/sHmplyb.png)
Foreman - $5
Action
Choose 3 different things to get in the listed order: +1 Buy; +$1; +1 Coffers; the next card you gain this turn, gain it to your hand; gain a card costing up to $4; this turn, cards (everywhere) cost $1 less.
(https://i.imgur.com/sHmplyb.png)
Am I misunderstanding something, because why would you ever choose anything besides +1 Action, +1 Buy, and +(http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/f/f7/Coin1.png/16px-Coin1.png)? Besides edge cases like Village Green.
Hack of all Smithies
$5 - Action - Attack
+3 Cards.
Turn your journey token over (it starts face up). If it's face up, choose 3 things: Trash a card from your hand, +$1, +1 Buy, discard 2 cards for +1 Card, or each other player gains a Copper.
If your journey token is face down, discard an Action or Treasure card (or reveal a hand without any).
Can I say "Choose up to 3:", or is that against the rules of the contest?
(https://i.imgur.com/rqtuEcmh.jpg)
Weaver
Action ($4)
Choose three: +1 Action; +$1; trash a card from your hand; gain a Horse; gain a Silver. The choices must be different.
Not sure whether this should cost $3 or not.
QuoteHack of all Smithies
$5 - Action - Attack
+3 Cards.
Turn your journey token over (it starts face up). If it's face up, choose 3 things: Trash a card from your hand, +$1, +1 Buy, discard 2 cards for +1 Card, or each other player gains a Copper.
If your journey token is face down, discard an Action or Treasure card (or reveal a hand without any).
This challenge seems to have pretty limited design space...
(https://trello.com/1/cards/61dcef4c2117ea18e03cb40f/attachments/61dcef52e4a6313737da3a7e/previews/61dcef55e4a6313737da3c65/download/image.png)
I'm not sure if this is a serious submission or not. The name certainly isn't serious.
(Also, I don't think rules specified whether the 3 choices have to be different - just that you had to choose exactly 3 choices from a list. So unless I hear otherwise, I've got a card that lets you make the same choice if you want).
(https://trello.com/1/cards/61dcef4c2117ea18e03cb40f/attachments/61dcef52e4a6313737da3a7e/previews/61dcef55e4a6313737da3c65/download/image.png)
I'm not sure if this is a serious submission or not. The name certainly isn't serious.
Should it instead be "...may trash up to 1 (2) cards..."? Otherwise you have to trash exactly 2 or none, which is sometimes worse than zero or one, which is what your opponents get.
I think it would definitely be too mean. If somebody stacked these against you youd be down to a 2 card handsize (or less) and have multiple good cards trashed (not early game, but still). It would also be really annoying if you could negate the trashing part for yourself with fortress and the opponent cant because they didnt happen to draw it in their starting hand.(https://trello.com/1/cards/61dcef4c2117ea18e03cb40f/attachments/61dcef52e4a6313737da3a7e/previews/61dcef55e4a6313737da3c65/download/image.png)
I'm not sure if this is a serious submission or not. The name certainly isn't serious.
Should it instead be "...may trash up to 1 (2) cards..."? Otherwise you have to trash exactly 2 or none, which is sometimes worse than zero or one, which is what your opponents get.
would it be more interesting if the trashing was compulsory? Or would that be too mean?
Architect
$6
Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or gain two Horses.
Choose one: +2 Actions; or +1 Villager.
Choose one: +$2 or +1 Coffers.
-
Setup: Each player gets +1 Coffers, +1 Villager and gains two Horses. (These cards should begin in their discard pile not in their deck or hand.)
Judge, would this be an acceptable card since it doesn't say choose three but there are exactly three choices to be made?
(https://i.imgur.com/VgOf6up.png)QuoteArchitect
$6
Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or gain two Horses.
Choose one: +2 Actions; or +1 Villager.
Choose one: +$2 or +1 Coffers.
-
Setup: Each player gets +1 Coffers, +1 Villager and gains two Horses. (These cards should begin in their discard pile not in their deck or hand.)QuoteJudge, would this be an acceptable card since it doesn't say choose three but there are exactly three choices to be made?
- The three choices must come from a single list. A card that lets a player "choose one" from 3 different lists will not qualify. (Under this rule, Count (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Count) would be different from a "choose two" card).
Black Spot • $4 • Treasure - Attack - Doom
$3
Reveal the top 4 Hexes; receive 3 of them (in any order). Each other player receives the remaining Hex and if they aren't Marked, takes it.
Marked • State
At the start of your turn, return this.
Until then, you are unaffected by Hexes.
(https://i.imgur.com/VgOf6up.png)QuoteArchitect
$6
Action
Choose one: +1 Card; or gain two Horses.
Choose one: +2 Actions; or +1 Villager.
Choose one: +$2 or +1 Coffers.
-
Setup: Each player gets +1 Coffers, +1 Villager and gains two Horses. (These cards should begin in their discard pile not in their deck or hand.)QuoteJudge, would this be an acceptable card since it doesn't say choose three but there are exactly three choices to be made?
This wouldn't qualify for the contest. Per the OP:
- The three choices must come from a single list. A card that lets a player "choose one" from 3 different lists will not qualify. (Under this rule, Count (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Count) would be different from a "choose two" card).
(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/827692005160648744/930527451560419398/Railway4.png)
A weird $7 Bridge/Inventor thing. Can technically gain copies of itself, but considering it costs $7 and will take a while to multiply, how worth it is it to do that?
Old versions restricted the Bridge effect to non-Victory cards and gave the +2 Cards option +1 Action. Former seemed too restrictive, latter seemed like a bad a idea to make this non-terminal.
Informant - Action - Reserve - $4
The player to your left chooses three (for you): +1 Villager; +1 Coffers; gain a Horse; put this on your Tavern mat. The choices must be different.
-
At the start of your buy phase, you may call this for +1 Buy.
OK, here's my entry - definitely feels like a v0.1 as there are several things I'm unsure of. But I want to get it posted asap, in order to get some feedback, as I like the general idea.
(https://i.imgur.com/P96Klpu.png)QuoteInformant - Action - Reserve - $4
The player to your left chooses three (for you): +1 Villager; +1 Coffers; gain a Horse; put this on your Tavern mat. The choices must be different.
-
At the start of your buy phase, you may call this for +1 Buy.
OK, so the general idea is to let your opponent choose 3 options for you. I'm willing to consider changing the ones there, but I did
like the idea of making them Market-like; though I switched from Action, Card, $1, etc to Villager, Coffers, Horse, etc. so that if those options were chosen they could still help you. And since there's currently no "buy tokens" I used the reserve aspect to simulate that (I've had at least one other card like that, Gondolier).
Of course doing that (the reserve part) makes it necessary to make all choices different. I would've preferred to allow for the same. If I wanted to introduce Buy tokens (+1 Buyer?) then I could change that up. That also could resolve the fact that this card might sit in reserve for a while (i.e. this choice is one the player to your left while likely often choose) - I could make it +2 Buys or +1 Buy, +$1 to make that one stronger?
Otherwise what do you all think?
(The other thing I'm unsure of is the name / theme - not 100% sure Informant fits for this, but it needed some kind of name that involved interacting with others)
Cleanse
Event
$4
Look through your discard pile. Choose three (you may choose the same option more than once): trash a card from your hand or discard pile; exile a card from your hand or discard pile; put a card from your hand or discard pile on top of your deck.
Cleanse
Event
$4
Look through your discard pile. Choose three (you may choose the same option more than once): trash a card from your hand or discard pile; exile a card from your hand or discard pile; put a card from your hand or discard pile on top of your deck.
On a 3/4 opening, you can exile all three Estates on turn 2. That's far stronger than Banish, and using a $4 hand to Banish an Estate in the opening is already often a reasonable play.
Cleanse
Event
$4
Look through your discard pile. Choose three (you may choose the same option more than once): trash a card from your hand or discard pile; exile a card from your hand or discard pile; put a card from your hand or discard pile on top of your deck.
On a 3/4 opening, you can exile all three Estates on turn 2. That's far stronger than Banish, and using a $4 hand to Banish an Estate in the opening is already often a reasonable play.
Thanks. I didn't think of that. I will up the cost.
At $5, this will give a big advantage to a player opening 2/5 (in that order), as you can then exile all 3 Estates on turn 2, but the other players can't exile anything on their first shuffle. IMO it's stronger than buying an overpaid Doctor in that situation.
I would suggest a debt price to reduce opening luck, e.g. 5 or 6 debt. (It's still clearly weaker than Donate at 8 debt.)
Let me know your thoughtsThis looks potentially more frustrating than Mountebank at first glance, you get to junk your opponent twice while also scoring a bit and trashing a copper of your own (also your card needs to say where the copper is being trashed from, Im assuming its your hand).
(https://i.imgur.com/tRcxLZT.png)
Is it legal to allow the player to choose one option from the list, then choose another, then choose a third? Meaning they get to resolve each before choosing the next one?
(https://i.imgur.com/VgOf6up.png)QuoteIgnoring contest rule issues, this is better than Village plus DoublePeddler which is similar in power level to Grand Market and thus seriously underpriced / overpowered.
Looking at grand market, I think at face value what the card does is comparable to Grand Market, but I had not considered the restriction Grand Market has to buy. I think costing it at a higher value makes sense. I appreciate the feedback thank you!
Tres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Queue the top three cards of your deck; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils; or trash up to three cards from your hand. The choices must be different.
Old Version
(https://i.imgur.com/igceBX3.png)
Also these are not my submissions but I wanted feedback from others on at least the templating differences of +$1 being in line with text or above.
(https://i.imgur.com/90QKBJ0.png)(https://i.imgur.com/vOxGROs.png)QuotePolygranites
$5
Treasure
When you play this, +$1 and choose one: +1 Buy; or +1 Coffers; or +1 Villager; or +1%; or gain a Spoils; or gain a Horse.
-
When you gain this, choose three from the list above. The choices must be different.
Does this seem not as aggressive and priced right?Let me know your thoughtsThis looks potentially more frustrating than Mountebank at first glance, you get to junk your opponent twice while also scoring a bit and trashing a copper of your own (also your card needs to say where the copper is being trashed from, Im assuming its your hand).
(https://i.imgur.com/tRcxLZT.png)
I think this would favour a 5/2 opening way too much.
| (https://trello.com/1/cards/61df5de375945847f8548040/attachments/61df866d96148b452328a908/download/Yacht.png) | Quote from: Yacht
|
Does this seem not as aggressive and priced right?
(https://i.imgur.com/Yx8Vhwa.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/igceBX3.png)QuoteTres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Exile three Golds from the Supply; or Queue three Slivers from the Supply; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils. The choices must be different.
Also an easy reminder for Queue rules
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20894.msg875641#msg875641
So I hear you want 3s, so I made a 3 and added a side of 3 and topped it with a 3. I was not satisfied so put more 3s on your 3s then added a few more 3s and just for good measure shoved in some extra 3s for you.
(https://i.imgur.com/igceBX3.png)QuoteTres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Exile three Golds from the Supply; or Queue three Slivers from the Supply; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils. The choices must be different.
(https://i.imgur.com/90QKBJ0.png)(https://i.imgur.com/vOxGROs.png)QuotePolygranites
$5
Treasure
When you play this, +$1 and choose one: +1 Buy; or +1 Coffers; or +1 Villager; or +1%; or gain a Spoils; or gain a Horse.
-
When you gain this, choose three from the list above. The choices must be different.
I was going off the original Bishop and it lets the other players trash a card also. The older version was too aggressive as there was 2 attacks in the card. I will see what I can come up with to modify it.Does this seem not as aggressive and priced right?
(https://i.imgur.com/Yx8Vhwa.png)
Tbh I think it's kinda weak now. E.g, why would you want to use an action to trash a single copper, if every other player also gets to trash a card, and I also don't see how the +1 Card option is ever going to get chosen, unless you don't have a copper you want to trash.
Imo replacing +1Card with +1 buy or +2 crads might be better, alltgough +2 cards could be a little bit strong.
I like the extend use of Victory tokens in this newer Version, but other than that I don't really see a use for this card, because it can't thin your deck (and even helps your opponents), nor does it actually harm your opponents.
As it stands right now the play is probably to hope someone else buys it, that way you get to thin your deck a little, and spend your 5$ on more worthwile cards.
And btw I would put a "+" infront of the coin and victory token, and add the Doom typing to the card.
(https://trello.com/1/cards/61df5de375945847f8548040/attachments/61df678f7cb09e6a7e91ca55/download/Cargo_Ship_(1).png)
Cargo Ship
Action
Cost: $5
Choose Three:
Gain a card costing up to 2; +1 Card; +$1.
The choices may be the same.
Cargo Ship is a Smithy variant with significant piling power, money generation, and flexibility. It can be used in nearly all decks, and provides a good reason to hit 5 early. There are synergies with Capitalism, remodelers, and rush strategies.
Feedback is appreciated.
1. You're missing the (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/6/6d/Coin.png/16px-Coin.png) symbol for the gain choice; "gain a card costing up to 2" doesn't make sense, but "gain a card costing up to (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/images/thumb/3/3d/Coin2.png/16px-Coin2.png)" does.
2. The name Cargo Ship is already taken by an official card.
Unnamed Card atm
Action
Cost: 5$
Reveal the top 5 Cards of your deck.
Put three of them into your hand and discard the others.
Quote from: Concept cardUnnamed Card atm
Action
Cost: 5$
Reveal the top 5 Cards of your deck.
Put three of them into your hand and discard the others.
I'm unsure of the price, I had it at 6$ for a while, but with a +buy, but it seemed a like a hard buy in non-colony games. Maybe I'll change the cost to 6 debt and +1 buy to spice the card up, as it's kind of plain right now.
Also I'm unsure if this qualifies, because you aren't choosing from a list, but cards to put into your hand. Feedback on that from the op would be appreciated.
Quote from: Concept cardUnnamed Card atm
Action
Cost: 5$
Reveal the top 5 Cards of your deck.
Put three of them into your hand and discard the others.
I'm unsure of the price, I had it at 6$ for a while, but with a +buy, but it seemed a like a hard buy in non-colony games. Maybe I'll change the cost to 6 debt and +1 buy to spice the card up, as it's kind of plain right now.
Also I'm unsure if this qualifies, because you aren't choosing from a list, but cards to put into your hand. Feedback on that from the op would be appreciated.
So I hear you want 3s, so I made a 3 and added a side of 3 and topped it with a 3. I was not satisfied so put more 3s on your 3s then added a few more 3s and just for good measure shoved in some extra 3s for you.
(https://i.imgur.com/igceBX3.png)QuoteTres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Exile three Golds from the Supply; or Queue three Slivers from the Supply; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils. The choices must be different.
I really like your submission, but I feel it's kind of too good. Especially if you buy this turn 1, there is a high likelyhood of you ending up with 4 golds in your deck by turn 3/4 (by queuing silver, gaining spoils, exiling gold, then buying gold). Which forces everyone to pursue the same strategy, as having that much buying power this early on is just too much of an advantage
Imo you should lower the T1 buying incentive by either only being able to exile a dingle Gold, or just removing that option outright to stick with the "3" Theme.
Does this seem not as aggressive and priced right?
(https://i.imgur.com/Yx8Vhwa.png)
Tbh I think it's kinda weak now. E.g, why would you want to use an action to trash a single copper, if every other player also gets to trash a card, and I also don't see how the +1 Card option is ever going to get chosen, unless you don't have a copper you want to trash.
Imo replacing +1Card with +1 buy or +2 crads might be better, alltgough +2 cards could be a little bit strong.
I like the extend use of Victory tokens in this newer Version, but other than that I don't really see a use for this card, because it can't thin your deck (and even helps your opponents), nor does it actually harm your opponents.
As it stands right now the play is probably to hope someone else buys it, that way you get to thin your deck a little, and spend your 5$ on more worthwile cards.
And btw I would put a "+" infront of the coin and victory token, and add the Doom typing to the card.
I can also create a version that follows the rules of this contest more strictly, although the card image generator isn't working for me right now so it'll have to be later. In case I don't get to it before the contest deadline, here is what it would look like (it is still an Action costing $5).
(https://i.imgur.com/RLgWfWx.png)
I can also create a version that follows the rules of this contest more strictly, although the card image generator isn't working for me right now so it'll have to be later. In case I don't get to it before the contest deadline, here is what it would look like (it is still an Action costing $5).
(https://i.imgur.com/RLgWfWx.png)
If you do end up using this version of the card, I would recommend reordering the list, so it is more synergistic. To my understanding, "choose cards" work by first choosing all the options, then by resolving them in the order they are listed on the card.
The final 3 options would likely prefer to be "look at top 5 cards", then "discard the top 3", then "look through discard and trash. It's also possible you might want at least the first two of these to happen before the option to "+1 Card".
| (https://uploaddeimagens.com.br/images/003/629/346/original/Geisterschloss.png?1642113812) | Quote from: Translation Ghost Castle |
(https://uploaddeimagens.com.br/images/003/629/346/original/Geisterschloss.png?1642113812)
Choose three:
Trash 2 Cards from your hand; +3 Cards, put 2 cards from your hand onto your deck;
+2 Cards; +1 Card; +1 Buy; +1 Coffers.
The choices must be different.
6$ Action
The most accurate translation of the cards name would probably be "Haunted Castle", but that name is already taken by an offical card (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Haunted_Castle).
The choices may seem confusing at first, but there is a lot of flexibility. E.g the card can be equivalent to Hunting Grounds (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Hunting_Grounds) (+4 Cards) or Tragic Hero (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Tragic_Hero) (+3 Cards and +1 Buy), which is also the reason why the card costs 6.
Furthermore the trashing and coffers allow for situational plays.
The chosen actions must be followed in the order in which they are listed (similar to Scrap (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Scrap)).
Swiss Village
Action - $4
Choose three (the choices must be different):
+1 Card; +1 Action; another +1 Action; +1 Buy; trash a Copper from your hand.
Rules clarification: After you choose, the options are performed in the order that they're written (so you can trash a Copper from your hand after drawing)
So I hear you want 3s, so I made a 3 and added a side of 3 and topped it with a 3. I was not satisfied so put more 3s on your 3s then added a few more 3s and just for good measure shoved in some extra 3s for you.
(https://i.imgur.com/igceBX3.png)QuoteTres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Exile three Golds from the Supply; or Queue three Slivers from the Supply; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils. The choices must be different.
I really like your submission, but I feel it's kind of too good. Especially if you buy this turn 1, there is a high likelyhood of you ending up with 4 golds in your deck by turn 3/4 (by queuing silver, gaining spoils, exiling gold, then buying gold). Which forces everyone to pursue the same strategy, as having that much buying power this early on is just too much of an advantage
Imo you should lower the T1 buying incentive by either only being able to exile a dingle Gold, or just removing that option outright to stick with the "3" Theme.
If you buy this on turn 1 choosing Coffers and Gold (and any 3rd choice), you're actually guaranteed to have 4 Gold in your deck by the end of turn 4 by spending the Coffers with your first $3+ hand in the second shuffle. (You'll usually already have them after T3, unless you've drawn all 3 Estates and 2 Coppers for T3.)
Even without the Gold option, the on-gain bonus seems very strong - e.g. choosing Coffers, Horses and Villagers means you effectively get an Experiment, a Ride and an instant-Acting Troupe put together (plus a green card) for just one buy and at most $3.
Tres Leches
$3@3
Victory
Worth 3% if you have exactly three of this (otherwise worth 0%).
-
When you gain this, choose three: +3 Coffers; or +3 Villagers; or Queue the top three cards of your deck; or gain three Horses; or gain three Spoils; or trash up to three cards from your hand. The choices must be different.
Does something like this count? The only mechanical difference is that you evaluate your first choice completely before figuring out what your next choice will be (the turning face down makes it so that you still can't choose something multiple times). I thought this would be better in this situation than having to choose all the choices at the same time.
(https://i.imgur.com/x6X6NNo.png) (https://i.imgur.com/QNt5VUM.png) (https://i.imgur.com/bYKRTos.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/lL3em7q.png) (https://i.imgur.com/OFYBnMX.png) (https://i.imgur.com/rKghWhn.png)
I can also create a version that follows the rules of this contest more strictly, although the card image generator isn't working for me right now so it'll have to be later. In case I don't get to it before the contest deadline, here is what it would look like (it is still an Action costing $5).
(https://i.imgur.com/RLgWfWx.png)
(https://uploaddeimagens.com.br/images/003/629/346/original/Geisterschloss.png?1642113812)
Choose three:
Trash 2 Cards from your hand; +3 Cards, put 2 cards from your hand onto your deck;
+2 Cards; +1 Card; +1 Buy; +1 Coffers.
The choices must be different.
6$ Action
Note that this is strictly more powerful than a Hunting Grounds without the Duchy gain ability on trashing, because the +4 Cards is an option *in addition* to other choices you have. The other combinations of choices don't seem like much to write home about, but the flexibility plus the fact that this is Hunting Grounds at a minimum makes this too strong IMO. You could increase cost to $7 but I think generally it's better to decrease the power level than have a card with a really high cost. That being said, I can't see it being too broken, just seems like it would play like Wharf where you get it almost every game since it was balanced on the (much) stronger side.
(https://uploaddeimagens.com.br/images/003/629/346/original/Geisterschloss.png?1642113812)
Choose three:
Trash 2 Cards from your hand; +3 Cards, put 2 cards from your hand onto your deck;
+2 Cards; +1 Card; +1 Buy; +1 Coffers.
The choices must be different.
6$ Action
Note that this is strictly more powerful than a Hunting Grounds without the Duchy gain ability on trashing, because the +4 Cards is an option *in addition* to other choices you have. The other combinations of choices don't seem like much to write home about, but the flexibility plus the fact that this is Hunting Grounds at a minimum makes this too strong IMO. You could increase cost to $7 but I think generally it's better to decrease the power level than have a card with a really high cost. That being said, I can't see it being too broken, just seems like it would play like Wharf where you get it almost every game since it was balanced on the (much) stronger side.
Yes it's better than Hunting Grounds, but not strictly. Being able to trash it to gain a Province and a duchy with remodel is something you can't do with my card, so I have to disagree with you.
I would never increase the cost to $7 as that wouldn't be much fun with the current concept.
I also don't think the card is too good, as hunting grounds is in my opinion not worth the 6$, especially as it's not better than Wharf (http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Wharf), which only costs 5$.
The only thing I would consider changing is making it so that if you "choose" +4 Cards, that you have to discard one afterwards.
But to be honest, I don't really like this card either.
You missed mine:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883834#msg883834
EDIT: FAQ: Choices must be different. Do I need to add "Choices must be different" on the card? or is that the default rule?
OK, here's my entry - definitely feels like a v0.1 as there are several things I'm unsure of. But I want to get it posted asap, in order to get some feedback, as I like the general idea.
(https://i.imgur.com/P96Klpu.png)QuoteInformant - Action - Reserve - $4
The player to your left chooses three (for you): +1 Villager; +1 Coffers; gain a Horse; put this on your Tavern mat. The choices must be different.
-
At the start of your buy phase, you may call this for +1 Buy.
OK, so the general idea is to let your opponent choose 3 options for you. I'm willing to consider changing the ones there, but I did
like the idea of making them Market-like; though I switched from Action, Card, $1, etc to Villager, Coffers, Horse, etc. so that if those options were chosen they could still help you. And since there's currently no "buy tokens" I used the reserve aspect to simulate that (I've had at least one other card like that, Gondolier).
Of course doing that (the reserve part) makes it necessary to make all choices different. I would've preferred to allow for the same. If I wanted to introduce Buy tokens (+1 Buyer?) then I could change that up. That also could resolve the fact that this card might sit in reserve for a while (i.e. this choice is one the player to your left while likely often choose) - I could make it +2 Buys or +1 Buy, +$1 to make that one stronger?
Otherwise what do you all think?
(The other thing I'm unsure of is the name / theme - not 100% sure Informant fits for this, but it needed some kind of name that involved interacting with others)
Maybe do +1 Buy and cost reduction? Or have it give you a choice - call it at the start of turn for cost reduction, at buy phase for +1 Buy?
Also themewise, maybe "Stores"/"larder"/"pantry", as in where one stockpiles excess?
CONTEST CLOSED!!!Yes that will be the one I will enter. Thanks
Sorry for the delay in posting this. I got stuck in a meeting. Once again, I am posting what I think is the complete list of all of the submissions. If I am missing any, or if the link is to the the wrong one, please let me know ASAP. I will try to have the judging completed in a day or two.
Lackar, I am planning to judge the last version of Cursed Bishop you posted (on Thursday at around 2:00 p.m. contest time) unless I hear otherwise.
- Master Laborers (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883823#msg883823) by CaptainReklaw
- Hack of all Smithies (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883834#msg883834) by LibraryAdventurer
- Foreman (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883832#msg883832) by Xen3k
- Weaver (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883837#msg883837) by AJL828
- Worm Hole (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7726) by mathdude
- Black Spot (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883877#msg883877) by spineflu (with Marked)
- Railway (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883886#msg883886)by Augie279
- Monastic Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883888#msg883888) by JW
- Will (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883889#msg883889)by 4est
- Informant (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.0)by scolapasta
- Cleanse (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883896#msg883896)by xyz123
- Town Hall (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883902#msg883902) by The Alchemist
- Cursed Bishop (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884016#msg884016) by Lackar
- Tres Leches (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883957#msg883957) by arowdok
- Yacht (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883973#msg883973) by jakav
- Scrier (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884018#msg884018) by exfret (with Spells)
- Geisterschloss (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884038#msg884038) by Meta
- Swiss Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884041#msg884041) by NoMoreFun
CONTEST CLOSED!!!
Sorry for the delay in posting this. I got stuck in a meeting. Once again, I am posting what I think is the complete list of all of the submissions. If I am missing any, or if the link is to the the wrong one, please let me know ASAP. I will try to have the judging completed in a day or two.
Lackar, I am planning to judge the last version of Cursed Bishop you posted (on Thursday at around 2:00 p.m. contest time) unless I hear otherwise.
- Master Laborers (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883823#msg883823) by CaptainReklaw
- Hack of all Smithies (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883834#msg883834) by LibraryAdventurer
- Foreman (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883832#msg883832) by Xen3k
- Weaver (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883837#msg883837) by AJL828
- Worm Hole (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7726) by mathdude
- Black Spot (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883877#msg883877) by spineflu (with Marked)
- Railway (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883886#msg883886)by Augie279
- Monastic Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883888#msg883888) by JW
- Will (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883889#msg883889)by 4est
- Informant (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.0)by scolapasta
- Cleanse (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883896#msg883896)by xyz123
- Town Hall (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883902#msg883902) by The Alchemist
- Cursed Bishop (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884016#msg884016) by Lackar
- Tres Leches (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883957#msg883957) by arowdok
- Yacht (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883973#msg883973) by jakav
- Scrier (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884018#msg884018) by exfret (with Spells)
- Geisterschloss (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884038#msg884038) by Meta
- Swiss Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884041#msg884041) by NoMoreFun
You there? Would love to see your comments!
If the cards haven't been judged in about 3 hours from now, I will judge them and post the results sometime in the next 24 hours.
Master Laborers (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883823#msg883823) by CaptainReklaw
This one really suffers from too much text, which admittedly is going to be a natural problem to run up against with this contest. I guess the idea here is to choose a card that's not otherwise playable? And the Curse-gaining option is there in case you've chosen Curse for this and want to gain more of them? But even then, a non-terminal +1 Buy and +$1 with -1 VP attached to it doesn't sound great. Maybe there's something I'm missing here.
Hack of all Smithies (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883834#msg883834) by LibraryAdventurer
Well the options are pretty bland, but I like that it only happens every other time due to the Journey token. That makes the card more interesting. In a game with more players, I'm guessing the Copper-junking will get really oppressive though. Yeah it's only every other play, but if this is your smithy you're often going to be playing several each turn.
Foreman (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883832#msg883832) by Xen3k
Six options is a lot! It's a tough line to walk between having terse options and having interesting ones. I do appreciate that the text isn't tiny. Gaining a card to your hand is pretty unique. I don't know, I'd probably cut at least one of these options for simplicity and with the hope that players will resolve it faster.
Weaver (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883837#msg883837) by AJL828
It reminds me a lot of Scrap! Still, it seems like a perfectly reasonable card. Simple too.
Worm Hole (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883839#msg883839) by mathdude
Tiny text! Choosing effects for yourself and an attack for others is clever, but it's political in a very un-Dominion way. Specifically the ability to choose the topdecking attack which may only hit the player to your right. Are they winning? Hmmm.
Black Spot (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883877#msg883877) by spineflu (with Marked)
OK. I feel like a lot of work went into this one to plug all the holes, but the whole thing still feels kludgy in a Fool kind of way. And I fought to keep Fool in Nocturne! Am I a hypocrite? Sort of. I think having "the first time you play this" on Fool would have been better than Lost in the Woods. Aaaaanyway I like the core premise of choosing Hexes, but I think that premise could be done more simply. Though maybe not with "Choose 3"! Man this is a hard contest.
Railway (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883886#msg883886)by Augie279
Buh. That's a lot of text and options. Um, hmmm. So it's a strong card that makes it easier to gain more of itself. I'm glad none of the options is +Actions. I think overall there must be some version of this that doesn't have the +1 Buy and "Discard a card" up top. As it is the card is so busy.
Monastic Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883888#msg883888) by JW
Well outside this contest, this could be worded a lot better. I'm not going to hold that against it though. Yeah, this is pretty cool. The only thing I don't like about it is that it's so similar to Chapel in how quickly it can trash early on. It's OK if some cards are similar to others, but that's an effect that I don't think there should be much of in the game. Still, cool card.
Will (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883889#msg883889)by 4est
OK, this one I'm all about. My instinct says it's weak early on. It might need some tweaking. But as a premise it's solid and I think it's probably close to being a great card. The thing I worry about it it running piles pretty fast. And in games with a cheap alt-VP it can gain a ridiculous amount of VP in the end-game. Maybe you can even just rush it. Hmmmm. In any case I feel like the concept has a lot of potential.
Informant (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883893#msg883893)by scolapasta
Bile rises in my throat when I see so many different expansion mechanics in a single card. Other than that I like it. A unique mechanic, not too wordy. I think requiring the choices to be different is the way to go regardless of the Tavern mat. Otherwise you just give them Villagers forever. Eventually you have enough Villagers, you know? But honestly the card would be better if the options weren't all things you could save. As it is the context of what you give them matters less, and therefore the decision is slower.
Cleanse (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883896#msg883896)by xyz123
I wonder if this fits on an Event with the large font. Um, this is maybe balanced. It doesn't really grab me. It gives you so much of exactly what you want. I don't know.
Town Hall (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883902#msg883902) by The Alchemist
Well that's sure a powerful effect. A super-Count. I have no idea if it's balanced. Probably not though, right? I mean you can just choose to topdeck two cards and discard 3, and often that's better than discarding your hand to Tactician. And the payoff is arguably way better. But of course it costs $8. Maybe it's weak at that cost! Either way it's complex.
Cursed Bishop (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884016#msg884016) by Lackar
Yeah I think it's too much like Bishop. Also trashing a Silver from hand is a very steep price to pay in order to Hex other players. I guess technically you could choose that option without a Silver in hand, but I doubt that's the intent.
Tres Leches (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883957#msg883957) by arowdok
Too much text! The 3 thing is cute, but I think you went overboard with it.
Yacht (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883973#msg883973) by jakav
Huh. This is an interesting one. I think I'd put the gaining option last. I was thinking it should be first so you can gain Copper and then draw it, but there's already +$1 as an option. Anyway I like the premise. The execution is a little too much of "everything you want in a Smithy", which is a neat trick with so few words.
Scrier (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884018#msg884018) by exfret (with Spells)
Whoa that feels like a lot of options, mostly because the ordering matters so much. It's an interesting way to do it, though.
Geisterschloss (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884038#msg884038) by Meta
Uh well, this doesn't really grab me either. Well I think I maybe like that +2 Cards and +1 Card are both options. That's cute in a way. But drawing 3 and then putting two back, and then drawing 2 or 3? Seems real fiddly.
Swiss Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884041#msg884041) by NoMoreFun
Perfectly reasonable, but not interesting.
I feel pretty bad. I think you all did well considering what an absolute beast this prompt was. Sorry for being harsh.
Honorable Mentions:
Weaver by AJL828
Monastic Village by JW
Foreman by Xen3k
Runner-up:
Informant by scolapasta
Winner:
Will by 4est
(https://i.imgur.com/sHmplyb.png) Quote Master Laborers -- $6 | Master Laborers (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883823#msg883823) by CaptainReklaw I'm a little unclear as to how this works. Do copies of the card loose their existing types, or are they Actions in addition to their other types? What about their existing abilities (of various types: on play, while-in-play, reactions, scoring, etc.). Do those go away, or is the Choose 3 in addition to those? The wording makes all of that unclear. I would suggest looking at Capitalism and Inheritance (both the old and new versions, and why it was changed) to help clarify the language. The fact that this can be played on any type of card (including Treasures) creates some additional problems. More importantly for this contest, as Gubump pointed out, the choices are not really meaningful. Three are vanilla bonuses that are always considered positive, while the other two are always considered penalties. Thus, a player will almost always select +1 Action; +$1; +1 Buy. | |||
| Hack of all Smithies (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883834#msg883834) by LibraryAdventurer A Smithy variant that uses the Journey token mechanic, alternating between a 1 card penalty and a choice of 3 of 5 bonuses, all of which are strong compliments to the drawing: trashing (strong after drawing because of the increased likelihood of cards to trash), sifting (which can help get rid of unplayable Actions), etc. I like incorporating the junking and trashing into a single card. In a lot of cases, it might render the card self-defeating, but here, because the player may have to forgo one of the other choices, the junk is not necessarily automatic (this is especially true if they are sifting, as they don't know what their final hand will be). This would almost be too strong, but the off-play penalty balances it out. A really strong entry that could be a lot of fun to play. Copy editing: "+3 Cards" should not have a period at the end of it (see http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Torturer). Also, the word "Journey" in "Journey token" is capitalized, and the first instruction after you tell it to flip over always starts "Then..." (see http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Ranger , http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Giant). List items are separated by semi-colons. | |||
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51813990694_5891fda681_b.jpg) | Foreman (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883832#msg883832) by Xen3k An interesting hybrid of Bridge, Inventor, and Sculptor (without the Villagers). By giving different options, it adds a degree of flexibility and potentially sets up a lot of interesting combos. At first I wasn't sure if that justified the jump to $5, as in games without some of those combos available, I don't know if it is that much better than Bridge (but it has to cost more, as it is strictly better than both Bridge and Inventor). But on second thought, I think it clearly does. Bridge is sometimes described as terminal virtual Gold, but that is only true if you buy 2 cards. This can always be terminal Gold, even if you are stretching for a single card. That makes it comparable to Legionary and Livery, and definitely worth the cost. One concern I had is that with a +1 Action token or Champion, if you get two of these in your hand you can empty the pile. That's not necessarily a huge problem, as each subsequent play requires 2 of the 3 choices, so a player couldn't do both discounting and +Buy, and thus empty the Province pile with no other help. But they would still get 9 hits of Buy or discount (after the first discount), which could still combine for a huge payoff (6 Duchies or 3 Provinces with no additional payload). However, I think this passes the Smithy-Lost Arts test, so I won't count it against you. Copy editing: Per the rules for http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Scrap , I don't think you need to say "to get in the listed order" as that is implied by the rules. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/rqtuEcmh.jpg) | Weaver (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883837#msg883837) by AJL828 A nice trasher + gainer. While it is limited in its ability to do either, the fact that it can do both, and that later in the game (once the player no longer wants trashing or Silver) it functions as a Peddler with a delayed +Card means that unlike other, stronger trashers (e.g. Chapel) it retains of function in the deck throughout the game (not unlike Steward). The choose 3 mechanic allows the a great deal of control as to the different elements. That trade off does not make it better than Chapel, but if it were, it would be way too good. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/ykU8WZi.png) Quote Worm Hole -- $6 | Worm Hole (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?action=profile;u=7726) by mathdude This card has 2 parts: a Choose 3 that will often function as either a smithy variant or terminal Gold, but with the option to forgo a card/coin for trashing, a buy, or gaining a Silver; and an attack that either gives a Curse, a Hex, or makes opponents topdeck down to 4 cards. This is a very strong card. The ability to be a smithy or a terminal Gold makes this a very strong engine component, allowing for drawing at first, and then if the player draws their deck (or even before), that excess +Cards can be converted into trashing, payload, +Buys, or (least likely) Silvers. The attack is also unusually strong. Unlike a standard Curser, which only works until the Curses run out, this continues to attack, and its attacks can combine to be extra nasty (making a player gain a Curse to hand and then making them topdeck an extra card, probably the Curse). While it is priced above the likes of Torturer or Werewolf, the amount stronger it gets is not reflected in the $1 increase in price. I am partial to engine components, but I think this one is too good. Copy editing: Wormhole is one word. | |||
(https://trello.com/1/cards/61ddd4c54ffab003c5c84b76/attachments/61ddd4cb5a83595e88f42d91/previews/61ddd4ce5a83595e88f42f76/download/image.png)(https://trello.com/1/cards/61ddd4c54ffab003c5c84b76/attachments/61ddd4d3361f2274bb9c9e85/previews/61ddd4d5361f2274bb9c9f44/download/image.png) | Black Spot (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883877#msg883877) by spineflu (with Marked) A Gold that costs $4, but when its played gives the player 3 of 4 Hexes and gives the last one to the other players. It uses a State ("Marked") to ensure that players only get 1 Hex between their turns. The obvious comparison is to Skulk, which gives you a Gold and a junk card Hexer. Taking 3 of 4 Hexes of the player's choice is an odd effect. If their is a particular Hex you want to avoid (say, Miserable), you can always do so on your turns plays of Black Spot. There is also the potential to order the Hexes in such a way as to mitigate their effect. At the extreme, you could take Plague (gaining a Curse to your hand), then Haunting (topdecking the Curse), the Locust (trashing the Curse), causing the 3 Hexes to cancel each other out. This is unlikely, as it would require the player to have 4 cards in hand. In most cases, a player will play their other Treasures first, to avoid being hit by Haunting or Poverty. This will also (potentially) cycle through the Curse pile relatively quickly. Absent other Doom cards, a player who keeps track of what was played the first 2 times after a Shuffle (or who scrolls up the log in an online game) will know what 4 Hexes are coming. This makes using the Hexes to your advantage much more feasible: setting up a Haunting - Locusts to trash Curses, Ruins, Stonemasons (if there are no Ruins), Coppers/Estates (after the Curse pile is emptied), or even Fortresses (if there's something cheaper you want). Setting up a Bad Omens - Locust or a Bad Omens + Loan. All of this makes it feel like it would potentially make the card very swingy, as the player who happens to get the 3rd time around has (potentially) a big advantage. It is a fun and interesting concept, but I think playing it would be a bit rough. | |||
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/827692005160648744/930552832145387631/Railway5.png) Quote Railway $7 Action | Railway (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883886#msg883886) by Augie279 This seems very strong. On a single play you can have $1 of discounting, gain a $5 card, and have +2 Buys and +$2 to add to your payload (less the 1 card you had to discard) to shop at a discount. In a good engine (or with Lost Arts/Teacher/Champion), it is not hard to imagine playing a string of these choosing the general discount, +2 Cards, and +1 Buy, +$2. Just 3 plays like that gives you $6, 6 Buys, and a $3 discount, which would let you buy a ton of $3, $4, and $5 engine components. If you managed 5 plays and just $2 more you could buy 4 Provinces and There are a few important limitations. The discarding before the choice does limit its usefulness as an engine component: it has a net neutral effect on your handsize, but (unlike Fugitive) you cannot discard one of the cards drawn. And, of course, it is terminal, so they must be lined up with extra Actions to play more than one of them. The other major impediment is the high cost, $7. However, this impediment is somewhat offset by the card's ability to self-gain. When doing so, a player still gets the 1 point of general discounting, and an extra Buy, at the cost of discarding a card. With 2 Coppers and a Silver they could buy another Railway or 2 Villages. My concern is that this could make the card very swingy. If a player happens to get 2 Silvers and 3 Coppers after their first shuffle and buys a Railway on turn 3 or 4 would be in the position to start loading their deck with additional Railways and engine components to set up an incredibly powerful chain. By contrast, another player might not get a Railway until several turns later. The disadvantage could quickly snowball, meaning a player could effectively lose on turn 3. This could be exacerbated with Cursed Gold, Baker, etc. That being said, I do really like the card. I would suggest taking away the discount for Railway, and possibly adding another option to replace it (maybe topdecking the top card of your discard pile, which will either be the card you discarded or the card you gained). | |||
Monastic Village | Monastic Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883888#msg883888) by JW Another same-choice card, which allows the player to dial between trashing and gaining Actions. I like that the simplicity of the card fits the theme. I also like the fact that there will be at least some coloration between wanting more Actions (because you have Action cards to play) and wanting less trashing, or vice versa. The fact that it maxes out at +3 Actions with no cards drawn or coins given is a bit tough, but given the strength of its trashing and the fact that there is no risk of terminal collision, I think it is pretty well balanced. While not the most exciting submission, it is a well-designed card. The only other criticism I would have is that, from the perspective of the contests themes, the choices are fairly automatic (although not always). This is not necessarily a problem with the card generally, but it keeps the card from finishing higher in the competition. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/rpHryc0.png) Quote Will $5 Action | Will (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883889#msg883889) by 4est I really like the idea, both thematically and in terms of the concept of a gainer that gives both cards you want and some you don't. My main concern is that in a lot of Kingdoms, on the majority of plays players are going to feel like they are taking 2 cards they don't want. With a $5 card, it won't be long before a player is no longer that interested in gaining Silver. There are very few official cards that cost $5+ and gain Silver on-play, and the ones that do do it in a way that is more beneficial (e.g. gaining it to your hand). And in a lot of Kingdoms there is a limit to how many copies of cheap Action cards you can gain. I wounder if this might work better as a $4 Action. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/P96Klpu.png) | Informant (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.0) by scolapasta This is a very interesting card design. In a sense, your opponent is choosing one thing for you NOT to receive, but it still fits the official rules, and still creates an interesting choice, giving you a delayed version of each of the vanilla bonuses. Villagers are strictly better than Actions, and Coffers are nearly strictly better than Coins (the rare exception being if the Action gets played as a result of you buying something, so you can't use them this turn). The same is true of putting this on your Tavern mat, since (unless played during your Buy phase) you can call it the same turn. However, if you want to hold it over Informant stays out of your deck. The Horse is not strictly worse than +1 Card, but it is generally so. The choice of what to hold back can be an interesting one. I think the default would be the Coffers, although in a lot of games never giving your opponent Villagers might be the stronger choice. That is this card's one big drawback. If one of the effects is really useful in a given Kingdom (Villagers in a game with good terminal Actions, Coffers in a game with a high-cost purchase; Horses with good synergy cards), your opponent can just always withhold them. That makes the card inherently much worse at synergies and combos, which are one of the best parts of Dominion. As to the overall power level, I do think it is a bit weak. I think the +Buy is probably the weakest choice, but even if the card automatically gave you the other 3, those compare to Supplies in a way similar to how Patron compares to Silver. But Patron only costs $1 more than Silver (and has a reaction), while this costs $2 more than Supplies (and doesn't gain the Horse onto your deck, but does give you a Coffers instead of a Coin). You mentioned in your comments that you wanted the player to be able to give the same bonus more than once, but that didn't work with putting it on the Reserve mat, and you considered using +Buy tokens instead. I have toyed with +Buy tokens, but if that were a choice I think players would almost always just give their opponent 3 +Buy tokens, and the card would be almost useless. Instead, I would suggest a 1-shot non-Supply Treasure (like Spoils) that give +1 Buy and something else. I came up with 3 suggestions:
I'm still not sure I love the idea of the choices being the same, but either way I think something like this is an improvement over the Reserve option, and would strengthen the card in a way that would make it better. | |||
Cleanse | Cleanse (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883896#msg883896) by xyz123 I like the use of an Event in this space. It can mitigate the potential overpowered nature of choosing 3 things from a list of different, interesting option. Cleanse is sort of a twist on Donate, with some Banish and Travelling Fair mixed in. It is nowhere close to Donate's scale in terms of the number of cards you can thin, or even what cards are eligible to be thinned. On the other hand, its scope is wider than Banish or Travelling Fair in terms of the cards you can potentially exile or topdeck. The price point seems pretty good. It should clearly be less Donate, but more than Banish. The debt cost is a good idea. Like with Donate, it mitigates some of the swinginess of players needing to hit the cost (that's especially true here, as you generally want to but this just before you hit a shuffle to maximize your options). It gets a lot stronger in games where you need cards to collide (e.g. Treasure Map, Prince), but not more so than some other landscape (Donate, Way of the Turtle), and paying {6} to put 2 cards onto your deck and trash/Exile one more is still a fair shake. This is a solid entry, and a really high-quality Event. Copy editing: Option 3 should say "put a card from your hand or discard pile onto your deck." (See http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Harbinger) | |||
(https://imgur.com/r4brQVI.png) Quote Town Hall $8 Action - Duration | Town Hall (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883902#msg883902) by The Alchemist So, based on your comments, your intention seems to be that a player can take the choices out of order (specifically, they can gain the Copper and Curse, then topdeck it). This is inconsistent with the guidance for Scrap (and the general rule that card effects are resolved top-to-bottom, left to right). I would suggest you either say "Choose two in any order" or just put the gaining first (so it does not matter). I am always a bit weary of $8 as a price point. Outside of discounting or a Colonies game, you will generally be foregoing a Province to get one of these. That can be a tough call, even with a strong card. This is particularly strong. The obvious comparison is to Tactician, but this is much stronger. You don't need to get rid of your entire hand, so you can play this and (potentially) still buy cards or do other things. Even if you get rid of your entire hand, you can put the 2 better cards onto your deck for your next, enhanced turn. The trashing is also a really strong effect. You can topdeck junk (not just the junk you gained) and set it up to be certain to be trashed. You can also topdeck terminal Action knowing you will draw them before getting +3 Actions. Unfortunately, all of that is premised on spending $8 on an Action card (and, frankly you would probably want 2 if you could get it). In the right Kingdom this could be an exciting part of an interesting strategy, but a lot of the time you won't be in a position to buy it. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/1mltEfo.png) Quote Cursed Bishop $5 Action - Attack | Cursed Bishop (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884016#msg884016) by Lackar A twist on Bishop, which gives a Buy instead of a Coin, doesn't let other players trash, and can forgo one of its effects (the +Buy, the +VP, or the trash-for-VP) and trash a Silver from your hand to give out a Hex. There is technically an accountability issue with the Silver trashing, although I am fine with saying that revealing your hand if you say you don't have a Silver is implied. But even if that's the case, this card can still potentially give an endless Supply of VP, once all of the Silver is out of your deck. Now, a $5 card that just gives 1 VP and 1 Buy is not a super-obvious candidate for players to be doing nothing but playing it for VP tokens, but it is not impossible. I would suggest modifying the 3rd option to be something like "trash a card from your hand, and if it's a Silver, each other player receives the next Hex." This also makes the card a little better, allowing a player to trash 2 cards, and makes the choices a little more interesting. Copy editing: The VP token symbols are incorrect (in the editor, you should use %). In recent expansions/reprints, cards now say "(round down)" instead of "(rounded down)". Also, you forgot the period after "The choices must be different" | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/6o9linG.png) | Tres Leches (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883957#msg883957) by arowdok I really appreciate that you had some fun with this, and really ran with the theme of 3. I am intrigued by the 3VP-if-you-have-exactly-3 mechanic. I really like it on this card and what it costs. Because getting 3 Debt and 3 Coffers more-or-less cancels each other out, the card effectively costs $3. However, the added debt costs means it cannot be gained by gainers or remodelers (unless you remodel a Fortune), and if you want to buy multiple copies each turn you have to pay $6 for all but the last one. This makes it much harder to rush 3 of them right at the end of the game. However, while this is significantly less busted than the first version (which guaranteed 4 Golds and 3 Silvers in a player's deck by the 2nd shuffle), the on-gain abilities still make it too strong. As I mentioned, the Coffers effectively cancel out the Debt, making the real cost of this card $3 (and giving you a Coffers for each extra $ you have available). If you also take the trashing, and are able to trash at least 2 cards (which should not be hard as you only need to hit $3), you also have the net effect of thinning your deck, so there is no harm there (unless there is other strong trashing). You can also use the trashing effect to buy more than 3 of these, as long as you have one in your hand when you buy the next, and trash it (along with additional junk) so you always have exactly 3. Then, you are effectively getting one of the other bonuses (3 Spoils, 3 Horses, 3 Queued cards, or 3 Villagers) for just $3 and a Buy. That, plus the trashing, plus the Coffers for extra $, plus the 3VP the first 3 times you do it, makes this extremely strong, and all but requires players to buy it (especially as they can be locked out of the 9VP if their opponent cycles through enough times). I would suggest taking out the trashing. That makes taking the dead card part of the calculation, and makes it harder to decide when during the game (if ever) to go for these. | |||
| Yacht (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg883973#msg883973) by jakav A strong, versatile card that can function as either a terminal draw, terminal gold, or a bit of both. It also has the ability to gain cards costing up to $2, which is of limited value. Nevertheless, Yacht is a disproportionately strong engine component. The ability to flex between a Smithy variant and terminal gold is reminiscent of Way of the Chameleon, but this is even better, allowing the player to only partially shift between the two, getting 2 Cards and $1 or 1 card and $2. In terminal draw + village engines, the weakness is often that in buying engine components a player forgoes payload, and ends up drawing their entire deck with extra +Cards to spare, which effectively become useless. In addition to being a strong engine component, Yacht converts that extra capacity to payload. The gaining function will be somewhat limited in most games, depending what $2 cards are available, EXCEPT that on a player's final turn (if they know that's what it is), the spare drawing capacity that had been turned into $ can instead by turned into VP by gaining Estates. This is not necessarily a minor thing. In a 2 player game, 3 plays of Yacht can pile the Estates for an 8VP bonus. This also has the potential to trigger a 3-pile game end. Where this really gets broken powerful is with certain combos. At the lower (non-broken) end, with the likes of Hamlet or Native Village, the first time around you could gain 3 of them. It gets even more powerful with Inheritance; if you can Inherit a $3 or $4 village, then one play of this can not only gain 3 villages (supercharging your engine building) but also 3VP. The most broken is with Lost Arts/Teacher/Champion. Making this non-terminal, with the capacity to convert the cards into coins at will (and, at the end of the game, into VP from Estates) once your deck is drawn is crazy powerful. And with the Traveller lines, this has the added bonus of being able to be converted into terminal Gold so as not to risk drawing the Traveller dead. | |||
(https://i.imgur.com/x6X6NNo.png) (https://i.imgur.com/QNt5VUM.png) Quote Scrier $5 Action Quote Advance Time $0 Action - Spell Quote Draw Energies $0 Action - Spell Quote See the Future $0 Action - Spell Quote Switch Timelines $0 Action - Spell Quote Undo History $0 Action - Spell | Scrier (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884018#msg884018) by exfret (with Spells) An interesting deck-control card. It has 3 different ways to manipulate your deck: looking at and ordering the top 5 cards, discarding the top 3, or trashing a card from your discard. If you want just one of these options, it can also be a cantrip, or your can use it terminally just to make your next turn better. Since you can choose the order, and resolve one before choosing the next, your decision can be based upon what you learn. In many cases, a player would choose See the Future, and then depending on what they saw they could use 2 other Spells to do a wide variety of things, including drawing the card they put on top non-terminally, drawing it terminally and using one of the deck-control spells, or using both deck-control spell. I do like that this gives you a huge number of choices, but it does feel a bit on the strong side. The obvious comparison is to Cartographer. While this card is not strictly better, as it cannot be a cantrip and scout and reorder and discard, the fact that it can reorder prior to drawing makes it much, much better. If only used for non-terminal drawing/deck ordering, playing 1 Scrier is basically the equivalent to playing 2 Cartographers. The fact that they are priced the same makes me think this is too good. Off the top of my head, I would suggest making the player discard a card somewhere (either at the top or with Advance Time). Also, while this implementation is acceptable, I think cramming them onto one card (with "Choose 3 different things to play in any order") would have been preferable. While it makes the text quite small, adding the 5 different cards creates needless complexity. A fun and interesting card, but as is I think it's a bit too strong. | |||
| Geisterschloss (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884038#msg884038) by Meta A strong terminal drawing card, with the added ability to trash, or to get a Buy, a Coins, or a Coffers. As with Worm Hole and Yacht, the fact fact that this is a drawer which can shift incrementally into payload makes it an extremely strong engine component. The addition of both trashing and +Buy makes it even stronger. And while it costs more than either of those, it also tops out at 4 Cards (drawing obvious parallels to Hunting Grounds), and has the capacity to give you +2 Cards, along with $2 of payload (one as a Coffers). And the +3 Cards, topdeck 2 is yet another strong engine component, as it allows you to avoid terminal collisions when you have to play this with your last Action. While you cannot turn all 3 of your draws into payload, you can turn 2 into payload and the last into a Buy. While this somewhat mitigates the card's strength, I still think it is too powerful. | |||
Swiss Village | Swiss Village (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21027.msg884041#msg884041) by NoMoreFun I like villages (I am partial to engine strategies) and I really like this concept: taking a familiar card design (here, the village) and breaking its parts into 3 list items, then offering the player other things for each of those items they forgo. Here, they can either get a +Buy or Copper trashing. Neither are particularly strong, but it makes up for that by providing a lot of flexibility. It potentially combines well with draw-to-X cards like Watchtower: a player can take +2 Actions, trash a Copper, then play a Watchtower to draw 4 cards (having started from a 5 card hand). |