Dominion Strategy Forum

Dominion => Weekly Design Contest => Variants and Fan Cards => Mini-Set Design Contest => Topic started by: rinkworks on August 02, 2012, 04:40:14 pm

Title: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 02, 2012, 04:40:14 pm
Challenge #9 is to make a Terminal Silver card.  This challenge has restrictions above and beyond what its name implies, too, as it denies you the right to include special rules or anything but on-play behavior.  It'll be tricky to come up with a good card under such restrictive parameters, but that's sort of the point.  If you prefer the more broad challenges, though, you may find #10 -- to be posted momentarily -- more to your liking.

This challenge has a rule change:  Previously, you couldn't submit the same card to more than a single challenge (although I forgot about the rule and permitted this in a couple of cases).  The new rule is that you can't submit the same card to more than one challenge that is still running.  If you submitted a card to a challenge whose results have been posted, it's fair to resubmit it to another challenge.

Meanwhile, your votes for Challenges #7 and #8 are due Monday, August 6, at 10am EDT.  Get your votes in early, as there will be other Dominion-related things to do that day (Dark Ages previews!).

--

Submission Rules

* Submit no more than one card per person per challenge.  You do not need to submit for all challenges if you don't want to, but of course you can't win if you don't compete.
* Submit your cards to me via this forum's messaging system.  Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.
* Each card you submit must have a name, a cost, a list of types, and the exact wording that should appear on the card.  Also include a brief description of any special design considerations (e.g., Stash having a unique back), but do NOT include any other information, such as strategic commentary or examples about it would play.
* Although you must submit names for each of your cards, the names will not be listed on the voting ballots, so make sure your card's appeal does not depend on your choice of name.
* I will accept revisions to your contest entries provided they are submitted to me before the deadline.  If you submit a revision to an entry you have previously submitted to me, resubmit your revised card(s) in their entirety.  That is, don't tell me "Oh, can you make that +2 Cards say +3 Cards instead?"  Just resubmit the full card.
* Only submit cards that are your own design.
* You may submit cards that have been previously posted here in this forum, including those that have been refined by the community as a whole, provided you can still claim that the central conceit of the card -- and the majority of its final version -- is yours.  This applies to cards previously posted, however -- if your submissions aren't already posted on his board, please refrain from doing so until after the results have been announced.
* A single card might conceivably qualify for multiple challenges within this series.  However, you may not submit the same card for more than one concurrent challenge.  That is, if you have submitted a card to one challenge, you may not submit it to another challenge until the results of that first challenge have been announced.
* Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere

--

The deadline for this week's challenges is Thursday, August 9, at 10am EDT.

--

Challenge #9 - Terminal Silver

Objective: Create a Terminal Silver card that conforms to the following constraints:

(1) The card type must be "Action" or "Action-Attack."  No other type or dual-type combinations are permitted.
(2) The card must provide exactly +$2 each time it is played; never any more or less.  Receipt of the +$2 cannot be conditional in any way.
(3) The card must be a terminal; that is, it must never provide +Actions.
(4) The player must have one fewer card in his hand after playing the card than he did beforehand.  Edge case exceptions to this rule are permitted.
(5) The card may not gain any Treasure cards to hand.  (Gaining them elsewhere is fine.)
(6) The card must not have a horizontal line in the card text.  To put it another way, it may only have "on play" effects; no "while in play," "on buy," or "on gain" effects are permitted.  Additionally, it may not have any special rules (Duchess, Embargo) or setup instructions (Black Market).

Official Examples: Chancellor, Woodcutter, Militia, Swindler, Cutpurse, Navigator, Monument, Mountebank, Jester.

Official Non-Examples: Festival, because it provides extra Actions.  Steward, because the player may choose not to receive the +$2 bonus.  Conspirator, because sometimes the card provides +1 Action and replaces itself in your hand.  Minion, because it provides an extra Action and gives the player the choice not to receive the +$2.  Explorer, because it gains a Silver (or Gold) to hand, rather than giving +$2, and doesn't leave your hand size down a card.  Merchant Ship, because it has an "Action-Duration" type.  Goons and Haggler, because they have "while in play" effects.  Nomad Camp, because it has an "on gain" effect.  Duchess, Embargo, and Black Market, because they have special rules listed below a horizontal line.  Silver, Royal Seal, and Stash, because they are Treasure cards.

--

The Ballot (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3748.msg81545#msg81545)
The Results (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3748.msg88495#msg88495)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: GendoIkari on August 02, 2012, 05:02:47 pm
Based on the winning card of the Peddler variant contest; I would assume that a card that gains a silver directly into hand would count? Assuming that you end up with one less card than before you played it.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tdog on August 02, 2012, 05:03:23 pm
Would Minion be an example?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Archetype on August 02, 2012, 05:16:54 pm
I'm assuming no.

It gives you 1 Action and gives you the choice not to receive the +2$
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tdog on August 02, 2012, 05:18:02 pm
I'm assuming no.

It gives you 1 Action and gives you the choice not to receive the +2$

Oh yeah I forgot about the action nm.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 02, 2012, 05:44:05 pm
Time to submit Exile Isle..
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Polk5440 on August 02, 2012, 05:46:33 pm
This challenge has a rule change:  Previously, you couldn't submit the same card to more than a single challenge (although I forgot about the rule and permitted this in a couple of cases).  The new rule is that you can't submit the same card to more than one challenge that is still running.  If you submitted a card to a challenge whose results have been posted, it's fair to resubmit it to another challenge.

Thanks. Maybe we'll see some interesting resubmissions of cards that fit better in other categories!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: nopawnsintended on August 02, 2012, 07:07:14 pm
I like it.  I think all the constraints will have people dig deep for interesting cards.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: jonts26 on August 02, 2012, 07:23:14 pm
Can a Action-Reaction card be submitted? I am guessing no, now that I have read the line about additional text not being allowed...

(1) The card type must be "Action" or "Action-Attack."  No other type or dual-type combinations are permitted.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Schneau on August 02, 2012, 08:57:20 pm
Meanwhile, your votes for Challenges #5 and #6 are due Monday, August 6, at 10am EDT.

I think you mean #7 and #8.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: NoMoreFun on August 02, 2012, 10:46:36 pm
To clarify, is gaining a silver in hand ok (as long as you also satisfy the "at least one less card" rule)?

EDIT: I'm guessing no because you can choose not to play the silver
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Morgrim7 on August 02, 2012, 11:04:02 pm
Shoot, I just realized that I could have submitted my reaction idea if I didn't post it. :(
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 02, 2012, 11:44:42 pm
Shoot, I just realized that I could have submitted my reaction idea if I didn't post it. :(

But reactions have things below a line, so it doesn't fit this particular contest.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: WheresMyElephant on August 02, 2012, 11:49:39 pm
To clarify, is gaining a silver in hand ok (as long as you also satisfy the "at least one less card" rule)?

EDIT: I'm guessing no because you can choose not to play the silver

More likely no because of the "must give an unconditional $2" rule in tandem with the "player must have one fewer card in hand" rule. If your hand is CCCCX (with X your proposed silver-gaining card) how do you gain a Silver in hand and still wind up with 4 cards? You will have to discard two Coppers. But now X was worth $0. I don't think you could come up with any card wording convoluted enough to cover cases like this and still meet the requirements.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Kirian on August 03, 2012, 02:00:48 am
Would Embargo be safe if it handed out Curses directly when trashing the card?  Or Duchess if it couldn't be gained for free with a Duchy?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 03, 2012, 08:21:41 am
Based on the winning card of the Peddler variant contest; I would assume that a card that gains a silver directly into hand would count? Assuming that you end up with one less card than before you played it.

I'm going to say no this time, just because I'm trying to be super strict with this one, just to see what people can do within those constraints.  In any case, others have beaten me to pointing out the convolutions you'd have to go through to satisfy the other requirements of the challenge with a Silver gainer.

Can a Action-Reaction card be submitted? I am guessing no, now that I have read the line about additional text not being allowed...

Correct.

Meanwhile, your votes for Challenges #5 and #6 are due Monday, August 6, at 10am EDT.

I think you mean #7 and #8.

Oops.  Fixed.

Would Embargo be safe if it handed out Curses directly when trashing the card?  Or Duchess if it couldn't be gained for free with a Duchy?

I believe so, yes.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: WanderingWinder on August 03, 2012, 01:28:20 pm
Some hypothetical abilities to see if stuff is sufficiently edge case for rule 4:
+1 card, discard one card - this fails if your deck is empty. Does it make a differs ce if it is more than 1 card each way/how many is too many?
Discard 1 card, +1 card - fails if hand was already empty. Here, even if it's fine for one, it obviously is too much if it would go up to say 5. I would guess 2 might be the limit here...
Discard a card, gain an X in hand (where X is some particular card. Could also be in opposite order.) Has same issues as above, also fails if the X pile is empty. And obviously isn't always +2 if gained card is a treasure.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Graystripe77 on August 03, 2012, 01:48:33 pm
Some hypothetical abilities to see if stuff is sufficiently edge case for rule 4:
+1 card, discard one card - this fails if your deck is empty. Does it make a differs ce if it is more than 1 card each way/how many is too many?
Discard 1 card, +1 card - fails if hand was already empty. Here, even if it's fine for one, it obviously is too much if it would go up to say 5. I would guess 2 might be the limit here...
Discard a card, gain an X in hand (where X is some particular card. Could also be in opposite order.) Has same issues as above, also fails if the X pile is empty. And obviously isn't always +2 if gained card is a treasure.

I believe edge cases would be permitted, it was mentioned in the rules.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 03, 2012, 01:53:10 pm
Some hypothetical abilities to see if stuff is sufficiently edge case for rule 4:
+1 card, discard one card - this fails if your deck is empty. Does it make a difference if it is more than 1 card each way/how many is too many?

This is fine.  It never occurred to me that there would have to be a hard limit, though, but you're right:  +10000 cards, discard +10000 cards is unlikely to leave you with the right number.  But anything reasonable should be fine.  What's the most cards any official card lets you draw (when a fixed number is provided)?  5?  5 is fine.

Quote
Discard 1 card, +1 card - fails if hand was already empty. Here, even if it's fine for one, it obviously is too much if it would go up to say 5. I would guess 2 might be the limit here...

2 sounds good to me too.

Quote
Discard a card, gain an X in hand (where X is some particular card. Could also be in opposite order.) Has same issues as above, also fails if the X pile is empty. And obviously isn't always +2 if gained card is a treasure.

This is a lot tougher to examine, but my initial thoughts are something like this:

(1) No gaining Treasure to hand, as that violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the fixed +$2 benefit.
(2) No gaining specific kingdom cards to hand, nor Curses, as these piles are likely to run out.
(3) No gaining Estates or Duchies to hand, as these piles are likely to run out.
(4) Gaining Provinces or Colonies to hand should be fine, since, if one of these piles are out, you're clearly playing your last turn anyway, so that's a lot more of an edge case.
(5) Gaining an Action or Victory card of your choice to hand is fine, provided whatever restriction(s) there are aren't too narrow.  For example, "gain a Victory card costing up to $2" (or even "up to $4") is almost always just a fancy way of saying "gain an Estate."  But "up to $5" would include at least Estates and Duchies, and that feels okay to me.  As for Action cards, $3 feels like the lowest reasonable price cap.  Sure, some games will only have 0-1 eligible piles, but most will have plenty of choices.

I'm sure there are lots of other gray areas of this sort, but hopefully this gives you a sense of what I'm going for.  My tendency is going to be to err on the permissive side.

If anyone has a card they're uncertain about in terms of eligibility, feel free to PM me the card and ask.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Schneau on August 03, 2012, 02:08:09 pm
I assume Bridge is out, since even though it effectively gives $2 when buying 1 card, it gives more with multiple buys?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: andwilk on August 03, 2012, 02:24:53 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tdog on August 03, 2012, 02:35:19 pm
Is a change is cost like Peddler allowed? It would be more text, but wouldn't have to do with the actual playing of the card.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: jonts26 on August 03, 2012, 02:45:21 pm
Is a change is cost like Peddler allowed? It would be more text, but wouldn't have to do with the actual playing of the card.

I'm pretty sure that's the point of no under the line text. The card can ONLY have on play effects.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: GendoIkari on August 03, 2012, 03:39:13 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: LastFootnote on August 03, 2012, 03:49:18 pm
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

Nobel Brigand: someone who won the Nobel Prize for Brigandry?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: DWetzel on August 03, 2012, 03:51:15 pm
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

Nobel Brigand: someone who won the Nobel Prize for Brigandry?

Exactly!

The qualification for winning the prize is that you must already have it before it was awarded to you.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: brokoli on August 03, 2012, 03:57:27 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 03, 2012, 04:51:37 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Clearly this is overpowered!  I suggest a price of $5.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zporiri on August 03, 2012, 04:52:30 pm
* Submit your cards to me via this forum's messaging system.  Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.


I'm fairly new to the forum-could someone explain to me what the forum's messaging system is or how to use it? Thanks!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 03, 2012, 04:55:51 pm
* Submit your cards to me via this forum's messaging system.  Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.


I'm fairly new to the forum-could someone explain to me what the forum's messaging system is or how to use it? Thanks!

Click on my username to the left of this post.  On the left, you'll see a menu option called "Send personal message."  Click that, then fill in a subject line and message body.

Welcome to the forum!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: GendoIkari on August 03, 2012, 05:06:40 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the fact that it's made cheaper by Quarry, and that you can play it before you play a Minion or Tactician.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Schneau on August 03, 2012, 05:08:41 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the fact that it's made cheaper by Quarry, and that you can play it before you play a Minion or Tactician.

AND you can buy it from the Black Market deck to get an advantage over others who can't get this amazing card!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 03, 2012, 05:27:30 pm
(http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m820xuKkNC1qdpyvc.jpg)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: nopawnsintended on August 03, 2012, 05:45:32 pm
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the fact that it's made cheaper by Quarry, and that you can play it before you play a Minion or Tactician.

AND you can buy it from the Black Market deck to get an advantage over others who can't get this amazing card!

Not to mention that it is a differently named card to help power up Horn of Plenty, Fairgrounds, etc....
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: WanderingWinder on August 03, 2012, 05:46:50 pm
And people say duchess sucks...
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: gman314 on August 03, 2012, 05:48:03 pm
It makes Chancellor look good!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: ChocophileBenj on August 04, 2012, 03:35:08 pm
And also Woodcutter, Fortune Teller, Navigator, Swindler... what, Swindler is good ?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Kirian on August 04, 2012, 06:26:06 pm
And also Woodcutter, Fortune Teller, Navigator, Swindler... what, Swindler is good ?

It's amusing that the set Terminal Silver (as defined by this challenge) contains three subsets:  Attacks, Cards that Suck, and Monument.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 04, 2012, 07:12:57 pm
Haggler


Wow Haggler isn't allowed :(
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 04, 2012, 07:29:21 pm
And also Woodcutter, Fortune Teller, Navigator, Swindler... what, Swindler is good ?

It's amusing that the set Terminal Silver (as defined by this challenge) contains three subsets:  Attacks, Cards that Suck, and Monument.

Yep. Honestly, I suspect we're going to see a lot more attacks...
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Kirian on August 04, 2012, 08:44:47 pm
Haggler


Wow Haggler isn't allowed :(

Yeah, there are several good terminal silver non-attacks, but they all have something "special" to them and so aren't eligible here.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Grujah on August 05, 2012, 07:54:55 am
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the fact that it's made cheaper by Quarry, and that you can play it before you play a Minion or Tactician.

AND you can buy it from the Black Market deck to get an advantage over others who can't get this amazing card!

Not to mention that it is a differently named card to help power up Horn of Plenty, Fairgrounds, etc....

It can also be a Bane against YW!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Davio on August 05, 2012, 09:12:24 am
I'm in!

As usual, spent a good 5 minutes on the card. :)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: A Drowned Kernel on August 06, 2012, 01:09:43 am
Does the card have to leave you with exactly one fewer card in hand before you played it, or at least one fewer card?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: O on August 06, 2012, 03:12:07 am
Hmmmm... after reading all of those constraints, here's my submission to this contest:

Strictly Worse than Silver
Action, Cost: $3
+$2

(just having a little fun!)

Look up in the sky it's... Pedantic Man!!!

This card isn't strictly worse than silver for the following reasons:

It can activate Peddler and Conspirator
It can be Throne Room'd and King's Courted
It can be gained with University
It can be put back on top of your deck with Scheme
It can be found and played with Golem
It can be drawn with Scrying Pool
It powers up Vineyards
It cannot be stolen by Thief or Nobel Brigand

 ;D

Play Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Fishing village - StrictlyWorseThanSilver - Library
And you draw 7 cards ! Amazing !

Indeed. I also forgot to mention the fact that it's made cheaper by Quarry, and that you can play it before you play a Minion or Tactician.

AND you can buy it from the Black Market deck to get an advantage over others who can't get this amazing card!

Not to mention that it is a differently named card to help power up Horn of Plenty, Fairgrounds, etc....

It can also be a Bane against YW!

It can also be the +2$ anchor for HP-X...
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: ashersky on August 06, 2012, 06:38:03 am
Does the card have to leave you with exactly one fewer card in hand before you played it, or at least one fewer card?

I'll second this question.  If it's one exactly, I'll need to revise...
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 06, 2012, 10:02:35 am
Does the card have to leave you with exactly one fewer card in hand before you played it, or at least one fewer card?

I'll second this question.  If it's one exactly, I'll need to revise...

One exactly.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Schneau on August 08, 2012, 02:59:58 pm
Man, it sucks when you submit a card to a challenge and then the next day Donald X. has to go and preview a card that has the same unique mechanic. I won't say more to give away my card, but just know that I didn't steal the idea, promise!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 08, 2012, 03:03:25 pm
Man, it sucks when you submit a card to a challenge and then the next day Donald X. has to go and preview a card that has the same unique mechanic. I won't say more to give away my card, but just know that I didn't steal the idea, promise!

There's still time to resubmit!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: One Armed Man on August 08, 2012, 03:05:40 pm
You get props for a DA prediction! If you don't resubmit, I will slide you a vote anyway.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Schneau on August 08, 2012, 03:11:25 pm
Man, it sucks when you submit a card to a challenge and then the next day Donald X. has to go and preview a card that has the same unique mechanic. I won't say more to give away my card, but just know that I didn't steal the idea, promise!

There's still time to resubmit!

I thought about it but don't think I will. The cards are different enough besides that mechanic to make them both have reason to exist as cards.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Polk5440 on August 08, 2012, 05:14:56 pm
Man, it sucks when you submit a card to a challenge and then the next day Donald X. has to go and preview a card that has the same unique mechanic. I won't say more to give away my card, but just know that I didn't steal the idea, promise!

There's still time to resubmit!

I thought about it but don't think I will. The cards are different enough besides that mechanic to make them both have reason to exist as cards.

I've been secretly hoping one of the Dark Ages cards is EXACTLY like one of the cards I have submitted or have on deck to submit in the future. Play testing would already be taken care of and it would be (almost) guaranteed to be balanced. In addition, I could brag that I've "created" an actual Dominion card that finds print! I think this would be more validation for an idea than winning a vote!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 09, 2012, 01:53:02 pm
Here is the ballot for Challenge #9!  Votes are due in a week.  New challenges coming on Monday.

--

Voting Rules:

Each person may cast votes as follows:  For each Challenge, you may fill your ballot out in one of two ways:

(1) Award 3 points to one entry.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.
(2) Award 2 points to each of two entries.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.

Submit your votes via PM to me by Thursday, August 16, 2012, 10am EDT in the following format:

Quote
Challenge 1

3 CardName
1 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName
1 AnotherCardNameGoesHereToo

Challenge 2

2 CardName
2 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName

Please use the above format!  One card per line, with the number of votes given before it, and no extra punctuation or anything.  This will make it easy for me to copy-and-paste your votes into the format my vote-counting script needs it to be in.

Do not submit votes for your own cards.  (If you do, my script will catch you anyway.)

By submitting vote(s) for a challenge, you will automatically earn 1 point for your entry in that challenge.  This is to incentivize contestants to submit votes.  (My script does this automatically, so don't worry that I'll forget to do this.)

Note that the supplied card names are for discussion/identification only -- they are not the card names that were submitted to me.  The proper card names will be revealed when the results are announced.  Whenever card text says "[This Card]" it means the submitted text says the card's own name there.

Inclusion on the ballot means that the card was deemed eligible for the contest.  You therefore do not need to consider eligibility when voting.  In some cases, this may mean a pretty loose interpretation of the eligibility requirements.  I tried to be fair but also forgiving when a submission came in that twisted the rules in a way I hadn't foreseen.

As a voter, you may use whatever criteria you wish in determining what your votes will be.  Be as forgiving or particular as you like concerning conformance to standard Dominion terminology.   For all winning cards, there will be a chance to tweak the wording as a community, if necessary, before they are canonized.

--

Amber
$1 - Action
+$2
Discard a Treasure from your hand (or reveal a hand with no Treasure).
If you discarded any cards this way, +1 Card.


Carnelian
$1 - Action
+$2


Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2


Jade
$2 - Action
+$2
You may gain a [This Card] in hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand.


Agate
$2 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with fewer than 6 cards in hand gains a Copper in hand. If no player gains a Copper this way, discard this from play. Otherwise, play this again.


Onyx
$3 - Action
+$2
At the start of Clean-up this turn, choose up to two cards you have in play. For each you would discard from play this turn, shuffle it into your deck.


Pearl
$3 Action
+$2
You may choose to have each opponent draw a card.  If they do, +2VP.


Jasper
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. He gains a number of Coppers equal to the number of Action cards revealed. Discard all revealed cards.


Topaz
$3 - Action
+$2
Name a card costing up to $2 and then reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
If any copies of the named card are revealed, trash them and discard the rest.  Otherwise: Discard the revealed cards and gain a copy of the named card, putting it on top of your deck.


Amethyst
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may discard a Treasure or Victory card; if he doesn't, he gains a Curse.


Sapphire
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.


Ruby
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.


Zircon
$3 - Action
+$2
Reveal two cards from your hand.  The player to your left chooses one of them for you to trash.


Alaxandrite
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Trash a card from your hand, then draw a card.
Each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting one (their choice) in their hand.


Kyanite
$3 - Action
+$2
You may draw 3 cards. If you do, reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you to discard. Trash the other two.


Citrine
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
+$2
Discard 2 cards.


Iolite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).


Turquoise
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least five cards discards a Treasure card (or reveals a hand with no Treasure).


Apatite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.


Beryl
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Draw 2 cards.
Discard 2 cards.
Everyone else discards a card and gains a Copper to their hand.


Aquamarine
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.


Chalcedony
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards 2 different named cards and gains a Copper.
(If the player reveals a hand of all the same cards, they discard only 1 card.)


Malachite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
When you play this card, you may trash it. If you do, +1 VP.
Each other player draws 2 cards, then shows you his hand. You may choose a card from each revealed hand costing up to $3 and trash it. Each other player then discards down to 4 cards in hand.
--
(Rules clarification: Attacked opponents do not see each others' hands.)


Garnet
$4 - Action
+$2
After playing this card, shuffle your discard pile and place it on top of your draw pile.


Labradorite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck. Gain a card costing exactly $1 less.


Sunstone
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.
Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards.
Put all revealed Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order.
Put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.


Moonstone
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Name a card.
Every other player reveals cards from their deck until they reveal the named card.
They discard it or put it on top of their deck, your choice.
They discard the other revealed cards.


Ametrine
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least 4 cards in hand reveals a card from hand and either discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.


Opal
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may reveal a Victory or Curse card from his hand. If he doesn't, he may immediately buy a Victory or Curse card, putting it in his hand. If he doesn't, he discards his hand.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is played, each other player may play any number of Treasure cards from his hand, then buy a Victory or Curse card costing up to the total number of $ played. All Treasure cards played this way stay in play until that player's next Cleanup phase.)


Peridot
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
+1 Buy
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and then puts it back. If the revealed card was not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.


Spinel
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck and either trash it, discard it, or put it back.


Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.


Melanite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top and bottom cards of your deck, then reveal a card from your hand. Place one of the revealed cards in your hand, one on top of your deck, and trash the remaining card.


Obsidian
$4 - Action
+$2
Gain a Silver.


Aventurine
$4 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a Victory card costing 5 or less.


Dioptase
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.


Ammolite
$4 - Action
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing less than the revealed card.


Tourmaline
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may trash a Copper.
Each other player may discard a Copper. If he does, he gains a Copper. Otherwise, he gains three Coppers.


Axinite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains two Estates or a Curse, his choice.


Bloodstone
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. You choose 1 for them to place of the bottom of their deck and put the other back. If any non-Victory cards are revealed, gain a copy of one non-Victory card revealed this way.


Rhodonite
$5 - Action
+$2
+1 VP for every $4 you spend this turn, rounded down.


Serpentine
$5 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.
If you discarded 1 or more cards, you may gain a Copper.
If you discarded 2 or more cards, you may gain a Silver.
If you discarded 3 or more cards, you may gain a Gold.
--
(Rule clarification: The Treasure-gaining clauses are independent. If you discard 3 cards you may gain any or all of Copper, Silver, and Gold.)


Hackmanite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Choose one of the following:
Gain a Copper, each other opponent gains a Curse;
Gain a Silver, each other opponent gains a Copper;
Gain a Gold, each other opponent gains a Silver.


Amazonite
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.


Celestite
$5 - Action
+$2
Look through your discard pile and trash up to 2 cards from it.


Howlite
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.


Kunzite
$5 - Action
+$2
You may discard a Victory card costing up to $6. If you do, gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the discarded card, putting it into your hand.


Larimar
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.


Mica
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$2
Discard 2 cards.


Brandburg
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: shark_bait on August 09, 2012, 02:08:17 pm
So much +$2!!!!!  Time to start looking through them  :)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Drab Emordnilap on August 09, 2012, 02:14:42 pm
Recycler needs a jewel name
Hey, my birthstone is a recycler!

( I was born in Febtober.)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 09, 2012, 02:18:49 pm
Recycler needs a jewel name

Oops!  Done.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Archetype on August 09, 2012, 02:26:27 pm
A lot of these cards are exactly the same, or very similar.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Titandrake on August 09, 2012, 02:34:23 pm
I almost decided to submit Emerald this round. I mean it's so tempting! :P
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Drab Emordnilap on August 09, 2012, 02:35:10 pm
A lot of these cards are exactly the same, or very similar.
It was a very restrictive restriction.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: jonts26 on August 09, 2012, 02:36:47 pm
A lot of these cards are exactly the same, or very similar.

Yeah, I think they all give +$2. What's up with that?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Archetype on August 09, 2012, 02:38:13 pm
A lot of these cards are exactly the same, or very similar.
It was a very restrictive restriction.
Restrictions do restrict you.

I am glad that there are unique cards too.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 09, 2012, 02:42:11 pm
Carnelian
$1 - Action
+$2


Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2

I'll admit, I chuckled.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 09, 2012, 02:48:59 pm
Mica was a total breath of fresh air after reading draw two-discard two-+2$ undercosted sooo much in the other entries.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 09, 2012, 02:53:02 pm
Mica was a total breath of fresh air after reading draw two-discard two-+2$ undercosted sooo much in the other entries.

I'd like to hear your argument for why this is worth so much.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Titandrake on August 09, 2012, 03:01:46 pm
If you open +2 Card, +$2, Discard 2, you get $6 as long as you draw 4 Coppers in a hand of 6. That means as long as you don't end up with all 3 Estates, you get guaranteed Gold. If you have Silver, the odds go up even more, and you could probably get a $7 cost T3/T4 fairly regularly. Think of how Embassy technically only gives you +2 Cards, not counting Embassy itself leaving your hand, and yet it's insanely good because of filtering.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: blueblimp on August 09, 2012, 03:07:13 pm
If you open +2 Card, +$2, Discard 2, you get $6 as long as you draw 4 Coppers in a hand of 6. That means as long as you don't end up with all 3 Estates, you get guaranteed Gold. If you have Silver, the odds go up even more, and you could probably get a $7 cost T3/T4 fairly regularly. Think of how Embassy technically only gives you +2 Cards, not counting Embassy itself leaving your hand, and yet it's insanely good because of filtering.
Also, discarding 2 cards from a selection of 6 is not much penalty. Probably there will be two green cards there, and if there aren't, maybe you discard a Copper and one green card. So in BM, it's an awful lot like +$2 +2 cards, which is very strong.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: WanderingWinder on August 09, 2012, 03:09:43 pm
First of all, with this many restrictions, I am looking for a card which is really out there and fun, not something that's oh yeah, that's solid. Also, I did submit cards here, so one of these is mine.

Amber - eh. Probably fine, but boring.

Carnelian - I'm sure this is balanced, but FAR too boring.

Emerald - Seriously? Duchess sucks, and this is basically worse. Also so, so boring.

Jade - Hey, a card! A card! And I actually think I like it ok. Supply trashing, or of course you can trash something else if that's more beneficial. A fine card.

Agate - This looks overpowered. The attack is a mixed bag, but you realize this normally nets you $4, which is way too good on a 2-cost. Also, Village+militia+this+copper = colony.

Onyx - So this is like scheme, but a terminal silver instead of a cantrip, and they're not guaranteed to be in the next hand, and it's two cards, and they don't have to be actions. You know, that actually probably makes this a little bit too strong. It is a very interesting concept of course, but I bet even just BM-this is good, and I would guess that in the right deck, you could use this to play some key card 3-4 (or more) times in a shuffle. But I REALLY like the concept. I wish it cost $4.

Pearl - 2 VP is so ridiculously good, sure maybe they get a zillion cards but I think there is a way to break this, beyond stacking it with discarders (which definitely does!) Would be fine if it was that THEY chose, but of course then it would need to be stronger.

Jasper - This is probably fine? It just forces a BM game, and is not so great for that BM game of course. Like, BM-this can't be better than BMU, but you can pick this up against an engine. In principle, I like cards that let you do that. I'm not so sure that I actually like this, because it seems like it might be too much. Hey, I do like being able to engine. I would love this if it were 'every player that revealed an action gains a copper' instead of 1 per action.

Topaz - Interesting. Looks like a very nice early-game trasher, but late game it basically MAKES you gain those cards. I guess you can use it like a gimped workshop too. I would guess this is too strong, because it goes up to 3. Shame, 'cause I like this too.

Amethyst - Okay, so they can discard a victory, in which case, no big deal. Or then he can cutpurse himself. Or then he can gain a curse. You know, I think this works. It's probably a bit boring, but I think it works.

Sapphire - So, half the time it woodcutters, with double buy, and the other half, it's just terminal silver? I am sure that there's some nice manipulation here, but especially 'cause you can't do this with your whole deck in hand, I want a better payoff.

Ruby - Another pile trasher. Well, a one-shot one-cheaper feast, and it looks like I would like it, but then I ask myself, how often, really, do you need 4s like this, and have 3 money? Eh, I think I still sorta like it.

Zircon - fake! Okay, that's just the name. Another early-game trasher, but this one is slow, and a terminal silver. Well, the terminal silver makes it better than the one-card trashers we usually see, but it can be bad late and, well, what deck am I building that wants this, really?

Alaxandrite - WAY too good. This is, well this is better than any 5-cost currently in print. Like, it is like mountebank, but you MUST trash and draw (well, this CAN be a drawback but usually won't be), and the opponent can't curse-moat it, and they can get one of them in hand? Still better than mountebank, even disregarding the cost.

Kyanite - I am sensing a theme here. Hmmm, seems too good, yeah, for sure, too good. Maybe wouldn't be if there wasn't the 'you may' clause, but that kills it, really.

Citrine - So this is a woodcutter that draw-front-filters two.... seems a lot better than something like nomad camp, HT without reaction, and just a bit too strong. Maybe even without the buy.

Iolite - Okay, another one like Jasper where you are killing engines. Wish this couldn't stack so well. Probably really really good, though again, ironically, BM-this can't be better than BM in a head-to-head.

Turquoise - Too close to cutpurse. Yeah, it can't hit multiple times, and in return, it hits other stuff out of copperless hands. I am sure it's probably balanced, but it's too close to cutpurse for me.

Apalite - replace their worst non-victory with a copper. A bit stronger than just giving out coppers, though mostly it will do the same. This is probably fine.

Beryl - This is like a combination of Citrine and Apalite, but because they can discard victory, sometimes this actually helps them, but this is still too strong

Aquamarine - Huh. Weird? Well, this probably messes them up, a good bit, especially if they are big money. It's like they always draw bad, right? Engines it can really hurt too, if they only have one village in hand. And then you get to mini-courtyard yourself, that's not so bad either. I think this is actually pretty strong, and I like it a lot.

Chalcedony - So, this is right out, just because it's stackable discard. I mean, you can't do it so often, but it's not THAT hard to get them down to only a copper that often, and they're just dead.

Hermalite - looks functionally identical to Iolite. These two should be combined.

Malachite - So... hm. Not too big a fan of the possible VP gain, and the other stuff just seems so... weird, but in a totally unspectacular way. I don't like it.

Recycler - needs a name-lift, rinkworks. Is this not almost entirely functionally equivalent to chancellor, except it costs 1 more?

Labradorite - Uh, interesting. Really terrible in a lot of decks, where there aren't 2s you want, but you do have 3s. Often hits something that makes you gain... nothing. And just generally does not seem useful enough.

Sunstone - A ha, interesting. Well, really terrible in Big Money, pretty awesome for engines, except it's a terminal silver and its only effect is filtering. Now it filters really well, but it still seems a bit weak.

Moonstone - So, name a victory card, and slam them all with it, or name a good action, and it misses the shuffle for them. I can get behind that. Also, can be used to chancellor the opponent, which is sorta awesome.

Ametrine - A terminal silver that most normally will be half a ghost ship. Fine.

Opal - Huh? Buy? With what? I guess the no money he has. Which basically means, gain a curse, right? But gain a curse or discard your hand is way too good here, or swingy anyway, and when it hits, way too good. I don't think I understand what this is trying to do though.

Peridot - So it's not stackable, but it's woodcutter that top-decks copper as an attack, which makes it a little better than the other things we've seen, and I think a touch, touch too strong maybe.

Spinel - Fine.

Tanzanite - Now this is a card that is out there, good. Is it too weak or strong? Hmm, well, it's really good for them AFTER the cursing phase, not too terrible before, doesn't stack well at all, I think it might be ok.

Melanite - What is people's fascination with the bottom of the deck? This is a fine card.

Obsidian - This is explorer which can't gain gold, essentially. As such, probably a little too good for $4.

Aventurine - Good-ish in alternate VP, great for duke, pretty bad otherwise. Too bland.

Dioptase - Filter 2 that lets you get 2 VP? Too easy to get into a infinite token kind of thing. Imagine a deck of KC-This-copper-copper-X. VP tokens are REALLY strong people.

Ammolite - how did this and Dioptase come in this order, because otherwise things look sorted by cost. But ok. Does this... combo... with scout? So, you probably need at least like a gardens for this to be useful, and it is REALLY useful once you start getting up to like Provinces. Hmm, what can I say, I like green, I like this.

Tourmaline - Well let's see, -$1 and gain a copper, or just gain 3? Probably this will end up getting lots of copper-flooded decks, and that's no fun. I mean, I like copper, but this is a LOT.

Axinite - ah-ha. So again we compare mountebank. This can't be moated, but doesn't give copper, and you can always go for the estates. This is probably good.

Bloodstone - Doesn't need the 'if' phrase. Probably weak. You get to make them have a card miss the shuffle, that's nice-ish I guess. You get to gain a non-victory. Well, that can be good, but mostly later, when you can't actually use the thing too much, and sometimes it's going to be bad. Compare with Jester.

Rhodonite - Too weak most of the time, too strong when it's strong.

Serpentine - So this helps you out in the greening stage, pretty terrible before. So alternate VP likes this too, and surprise surprise, I sorta like it.

Hackmanite - Copper vs curse, please, all day long. Well, until the curses run. Then something else, I dunno. This is actually a fine card though, really - you can have a curse-giver for 5, especially with the drawbacks it has.

Amazonite - Fine.

Celestite - Weak. I mean, it's good against cursers I suppose, but your discard pile isn't so big so often. Well, trashing two at once... eh, still looks a touch weak, but maybe fine.

Howlite - Seems too weak. I mean, it's going to be way too long before you can gain something with it. Okay, uber-strong with like KC, (though, hey, what isn't), but so weak so often....

Kunzite - This really does combo with scout! Pyramid-ing your victory cards from the bottom up, that is something new and interesting, I like it. Part of me is worried that it's too weak, because you get clogged, and another part is worried it's too strong, but I think... hmm, well seems to be ok actually, and if it is, I really like it.

Larimar - Terminal silver workshop with... a drawback, which is big-time mitigated in non-mirrors, but... I don't like that it cared about order of discard (even if it controls it), and it seems a little weak - I mean, compare to explorer if you gain silver, and if not, well, there aren't sooo many other cheap cards you so want.

Mica - Effect is strictly worse than vault, opponent doesn't get the buff, but... doesn't seem worth it. Also boring.

Brandburg - There's some wording issues, and I don't think this is at all strong enough to be $6. I mean, it is anti-mine. What happens if they get to chop copper, anyway? But this could definitely be 5, and I don't think it would be strong.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: DWetzel on August 09, 2012, 03:18:31 pm
Iolite and Hematite are the same.

(ninaed by WW)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 09, 2012, 03:21:31 pm
My faves
Quote
Ruby
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.
Simple and elegant.  It's worse than Silver without the gaining effect, but you can get multiples of a cool 4$ you want, or just take advantage of the flexibility this card offers.  Want Village for a Rabble engine, but don't want to be a Village idiot while you wait for the 5$ drawing piece? Consider this.
Quote
Moonstone
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Name a card.
Every other player reveals cards from their deck until they reveal the named card.
They discard it or put it on top of their deck, your choice.
They discard the other revealed cards.

This is a fixed Fortune Teller that can also zero in on KC's and discard them.  I like it.  I like Fortune Teller and wish it was good, so adding decisionmaking to that and powering it up is great.


Quote
Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.
I love how I'm not sure whether I want 1 or 2 of these in notrash, and how I don't know if I want 0 or 1 of these in a trashing setup.  And I'm saying that about a cursing attack.

Quote
Ammolite
$4 - Action
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing less than the revealed card.
I've tried to think of cool ways to encourage early Duchies, but they are tricky.  This one pulls it off well.  Compares fairly to Explorer and seems like it would have cool interactions with cards like Courtyard and Farmland.


Quote
Howlite
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.
It takes 3 "Duchess" quality charging plays to get this up to Explorer quality, so I feel it's probably balanced.  And I like crazy engine cards, this seems neat.

Quote
Larimar
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.
Backwards Jester seems like a cool effect.  Isn't "put it on top of your discard pile" redundant?  I like how you can force divergent strategies onto eachother using the "drawback"

Quote
Mica
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$2
Discard 2 cards.
This is vanilla, but I'm just so glad it got costed correctly once!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: blueblimp on August 09, 2012, 03:23:32 pm
Just looking at the trashers for now (because I like trashers). Disclaimer: one of these is mine, but not the one I like best. :P

Jade: Somewhat resembles Dark Ages' Rats. Doesn't decrease your deck size, so it can't trim your deck, but replacing an Estate with a Jade will almost always be really good--maybe too good, since it's like Workshopping a terminal Silver plus trashing an Estate, all while getting +$2.

Topaz: Very strong (trash 2-3 Coppers and lose no buying power? yes please) and swingy (name Estate, might draw 2 and trash them or gain one on top of your deck...).

Zircon: Some fun opponent interaction, and it's a pretty good trasher too. Not quite as good at trashing Coppers as Moneylender is, but the ability to sometimes trash Estates and later Curses is great. Seems balanced.

Spinel: Very similar to Lookout. A little weaker at sifting/trashing than Lookout is, but it gives you +$2, which is very helpful in early game. Seems balanced but doesn't bring a new idea.

Melanite: Also similar to Lookout. Seems a little stronger than Spinel. Maybe too strong: this card is awfully similar to "+$2, trash a card, draw 2 cards and put one of them back on your deck", which is really strong.

Celestite: Some Ascension-style (and now Hermit-style) dig-through-your-discard-pile trashing, although without the option to trash from hand. Like Counting House, it's so swingy based on whether you draw it with an empty discard pile.

Edit: Whoops, I missed some because I searched for "trash" and not "Trash"!

Alaxandrite (should be Alexandrite): This is beyond strong. Without the attack, it's strong, because it trashes a card without reducing buying power (similar to strong cards like Masquerade and Jack). Then the attack is an unblockable Mountebank. Yikes!

Kyanite: This is a more complicated, faster-trashing, and stronger version of Zircon, I guess. It's very strong: no reduction in this turn's buying power, plus you get to trash two cards. Then because of the "may", you can use it as a plain terminal Silver once you're done trashing.

Edit 2: I should be clear here that my favourite of this post is Zircon. (I'm still reading the others.)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Polk5440 on August 09, 2012, 03:24:31 pm
Carnelian a.k.a. Strictly Better Than Strictly Better Than Strictly Worse Than Silver
$1 - Action
+$2

Emerald a.k.a. Strictly Better Than Strictly Worse Than Silver
$2 - Action
+$2

These are the cards to beat!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Guy Srinivasan on August 09, 2012, 03:26:35 pm
Carnelian a.k.a. Strictly Better Than Strictly Better Than Strictly Worse Than Silver
$1 - Action
+$2

Emerald a.k.a. Strictly Better Than Strictly Worse Than Silver
$2 - Action
+$2
Strictly? Forge.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 09, 2012, 03:31:42 pm
This was a hard, restrictive challenge.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: blueblimp on August 09, 2012, 03:38:25 pm
Zircon - fake! Okay, that's just the name. Another early-game trasher, but this one is slow, and a terminal silver. Well, the terminal silver makes it better than the one-card trashers we usually see, but it can be bad late and, well, what deck am I building that wants this, really?
Hunting Party stacks, Alchemist stacks (assuming there's already a reason to go Alchemist), Double Tactician without other trashing, some Minion games, etc. Also worth considering whenever you might buy a Moneylender. I dunno, I can imagine myself buying this sort of slow-terminal-silver-trasher in tons of games.

(Disclaimer: it's not my card.)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Drab Emordnilap on August 09, 2012, 03:41:51 pm
Strictly? Forge.
Then 'strictly better' doesn't apply to any card because of Possession. Can't we all agree to define 'strictly better' in a way that we might actually be able to use it to describe anything?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 09, 2012, 03:49:02 pm
Iolite and Hematite are the same.

(ninaed by WW)

I combined these two cards into Iolite, so Hematite doesn't exist anymore.  The phrasing and punctuation was slightly different, but no functional difference.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Guy Srinivasan on August 09, 2012, 03:55:02 pm
Strictly? Forge.
Then 'strictly better' doesn't apply to any card because of Possession. Can't we all agree to define 'strictly better' in a way that we might actually be able to use it to describe anything?
Festival costed at 3 is strictly better than Woodcutter (for now :)). The on-play effects of Festival are strictly better than the on-play effects of Woodcutter.

But sure, what's your proposed definition of 'strictly better'?

In other news, I love Ruby and Aventurine, the 3-cost "trash for 4" and 4-cost "trash for 5". I think Aventurine might be too strong? Turning your useful 4 into a Duchy is quite good. Ruby, though, is awesome fun I think.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 09, 2012, 04:10:12 pm
But sure, what's your proposed definition of 'strictly better'?

This came up here (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3880.msg80687#msg80687) (with the conversation starting a little before and continuing a little after).

The bottom line is this:  let's say you have two cards costing $3.  One gives you +2 Cards and one gives you +3 Cards.  If the context of the discussion is puzzles, by all means, point out situations where the +2 Cards one might be more beneficial.  Maybe the +3 Cards one would trigger an unwanted reshuffle or something.  And there are always Cornucopia cards that would prefer one of each than two of either.  And Possession is always an argument for a weaker card being better than a stronger one.

But if the context is card design and critiquing fan cards (as it is here), then those observations are useless and distract from what might be a real, legitimate question about balancing power and cost.

Clearly the +2 Cards card is underpowered, or the +3 Cards card is overpowered, or both.  So how do we point that out?  It's not good enough to say that one is "better" than the other.  Sea Hag is better than Thief, right?  But Sea Hag and Thief do entirely different things, and their relative strength fluctuates based on the kingdom.  So "strictly better" is a useful thing you can say to convey this point -- that one of the cards does everything the other does, plus supplies an additional benefit -- despite that there exist obscure puzzle answers to the contrary.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 09, 2012, 04:14:54 pm
Added rule clarifications to Opal.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: blueblimp on August 09, 2012, 04:29:21 pm
Now looking at attacks, since there is much precedence in official cards for non-weak terminal Silvers being attacks.

There are a lot of "gain a Copper" attacks. I don't like these because gaining a Copper hurts an engine a lot, BM+X only a little, and actually helps alt VP. So basically the main effect of these attacks is to make engine players cry. So I'm not fond of any of Agate, Jasper, Alaxandrite, Apatite, Beryl, Chalcedony, Peridot, Tourmaline, Hackmanite.

I've grouped the remaining attacks roughly by their main effect.

Cursers
Amethyst: Resembles Torturer, but Torturer is designed to encourage chaining. Without chaining, this doesn't do much against BM+X, usually less than a Cutpurse does.

Opal: "he may immediately buy" is a rules nightmare.

Tanzanite: I like this concept (gives a Curse but also a trash option), but I feel the choice to draw a card dilutes the concept a bit. I guess that's there for 3p/4p?

Axinite: Taking 2 Estates won't happen much early, but will happen a lot late. This card is more complicated than Witch, but does not seem more interesting.

Forced discard
Iolite: When this hits, it's usually stronger than Militia (discarding a terminal Silver instead of a Copper+Estate). Swingy. Unfriendly to engines.

Turquoise: This is functionally a Cutpurse.

Forced trash
Malachite: Complicated, and being able to trash a Silver from your opponent's deck with no compensation is strong already (that's usually what Saboteur does, and it costs $5 and has no +$2!), and then there's the other stuff also. Way too strong.

Brandburg: I don't understand what happens when this trashes a Copper. Confusing. I'm not a big fan of forced-trash type cards, anyway.

Top-deck bad cards
Aquamarine: A sort of reverse-Courtyard. Seems damaging and interesting while not being too strong. I like. (Edit: I missed that you Courtyard yourself too. Still seems fine I think.)

Moonstone: A sort of customizable Fortune Teller. I'd prefer if it didn't have the option to discard the dug-up card, because being able to skip the other player's good card will be very annoying (especially if the attack is chosen to find and discard a Moonstone!). On the other hand, then, it'd be pretty much just a Fortune Teller.

Ametrine: Since a player will always reveal a bad card to discard-or-top-deck, you'll almost always choose the top-deck option, so the discard option doesn't really need to be here. Then it overlaps too much with Garrison.

Bloodstone: Usually, playing this gains you a Copper. So... this is pretty weak unless your opponent is running a VERY trimmed deck or you are doing alt VP.

Reverse Jester
Larimar: Too many moving parts to this card, IMO.


My favourite of all these attacks is Aquamarine. A clever, unique attack that shouldn't be too strong.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: shark_bait on August 09, 2012, 04:43:38 pm
Sorry for the wall of text.  I'll probably go and add more comments later, but these are my initial thoughts about everything.

Quote
Amber
$1 - Action
+$2
Discard a Treasure from your hand (or reveal a hand with no Treasure).
If you discarded any cards this way, +1 Card.

Most times discard a copper for another something.  If you draw another copper, it’s just like +$2.  If you don’t have a village and draw an action, it’s +$1.  If you don’t have a copper to discard, it’s most likely not very good.  I’d say a little weak but for $1, hey, it doesn't have to be strong.

Quote
Carnelian
$1 - Action
+$2

Not strictly inferior to Emerald

Quote
Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2

Not strictly superior to Carnelian

Quote
Jade
$2 - Action
+$2
You may gain a [This Card] in hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand.

Hmm… gain another terminal to trash a card.  I dunno how often the trashing would be worth it at the cost of another terminal.  Seems a little counter productive.

Quote
Agate
$2 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with fewer than 6 cards in hand gains a Copper in hand. If no player gains a Copper this way, discard this from play. Otherwise, play this again.

Seems broken with Any Village/Any discard.  The ability to give 3 copper and +$6 is absurdly good.

Quote
Onyx
$3 - Action
+$2
At the start of Clean-up this turn, choose up to two cards you have in play. For each you would discard from play this turn, shuffle it into your deck.

I’d call this good for engines and BM.  Shuffle your best Treasure in to play it again.  If you don’t have terminals left, put this card back in.  Seems good and doesn’t seem inherently broken in any way.

Quote
Pearl
$3 Action
+$2
You may choose to have each opponent draw a card.  If they do, +2VP.

You give them a one shot Lab and you get +2VP for it.  My instinct is that the +2VP is a bit OP for the player playing the card.  Tough to tell without play testing though. 

Quote
Jasper
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. He gains a number of Coppers equal to the number of Action cards revealed. Discard all revealed cards.

Detrimental to engines… moot in BM.

Quote
Topaz
$3 - Action
+$2
Name a card costing up to $2 and then reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
If any copies of the named card are revealed, trash them and discard the rest.  Otherwise: Discard the revealed cards and gain a copy of the named card, putting it on top of your deck.

So you can use it to trash starting coppers/estates rather effectively and then use it as a pseudo workshop for cheap cards.  Good engine enabler as it has potential to trash multiple cards without sacrificing your current hand.  Especially with other TFB to get rid of it once initial trashing is done.

Quote
Amethyst
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may discard a Treasure or Victory card; if he doesn't, he gains a Curse.

Similar to Torturer in having a choice to discard.  No draw makes it harder to chain though… so I don’t think it would get too out of control.

Quote
Sapphire
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.

Not really worth it most of the time.  The benefit is only marginal if you can use +buy. 

Quote
Ruby
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.

Inclination is that $3 is too expensive.  But I don’t see anything inherently bad with this.

Quote
Zircon
$3 - Action
+$2
Reveal two cards from your hand.  The player to your left chooses one of them for you to trash.

Card get’s riskier and riskier as the game goes one… kinda like lookout.

Quote
Alaxandrite
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Trash a card from your hand, then draw a card.
Each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting one (their choice) in their hand.

Multiplayer games with this intrigue me.  I don’t really see why the choice.  I mean sure there are some options for wanting to curse (deplete pile with watchtower/ambassador in hand etc…)  But most often I would always choose copper.

Quote
Kyanite
$3 - Action
+$2
You may draw 3 cards. If you do, reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you to discard. Trash the other two.

Interesting, you’d better hope you have 3 bad cards.  My inclination is that this card is quite powerful in BM games.  Possibly OP given that you can get an Embassy like effect and trash your junk and then choose to not trash if you don’t have bad cards to trash.

Quote
Citrine
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

Virtual gold and a buy and sifting all in a single card.  This card in my opinion is a bit too strong at $4

Quote
Iolite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).

Situational attack.  Not blatantly OP but has the power to be detrimental.  Rage inducing effects similar to swindler.

Quote
Turquoise
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least five cards discards a Treasure card (or reveals a hand with no Treasure).

Compare to Cutpurse.  Can’t stack but can hit other treasure.  Makes multiplayer more nice, probably weaker in most situations. 

Quote
Apatite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.

Most null effect apart from getting an extra copper.  Not blatantly OP that I can see.

Quote
Beryl
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Draw 2 cards.
Discard 2 cards.
Everyone else discards a card and gains a Copper to their hand.

Quite powerful.  Virtual money sifter with a discard attack and copper gaining attack.  Probably OP.

Quote
Aquamarine
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.

Another virtual money sifter type.  Cards on top rather than discarded.  Quite powerful again, but attack can’t stack.  Probably balanced.  I like it.

Quote
Chalcedony
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards 2 different named cards and gains a Copper.
(If the player reveals a hand of all the same cards, they discard only 1 card.)

I would call this almost strictly superior to Militia.

Quote
Hematite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card from their hand, or reveals a hand with no Action cards.

Haven’t we had this one already?

Quote
Malachite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
When you play this card, you may trash it. If you do, +1 VP.
Each other player draws 2 cards, then shows you his hand. You may choose a card from each revealed hand costing up to $3 and trash it. Each other player then discards down to 4 cards in hand.
--
(Rules clarification: Attacked opponents do not see each others' hands.)

Hmmm... end game you trash it and get rid of a $3 cost card from their hand with no benefit.  Seems alright as is.  I dunno if a Terminal $3 is worth it though.  I suppose timing the buy of this card would be critical because everything play without trashing it is a time you could have played a better terminal action.

Quote
Garnet
$4 - Action
+$2
After playing this card, shuffle your discard pile and place it on top of your draw pile.

A chancellor variant!  Interesting concept… I dunno if I would want to pay $4 for it. 

Quote
Labradorite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck. Gain a card costing exactly $1 less.

Hmmm…  most often will be kinda random… like Jester.

Quote
Sunstone
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.
Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards.
Put all revealed Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order.
Put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.

Kinda like scout… kinda not.  Interesting card.  Seems balanced at $4

Quote
Moonstone
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Name a card.
Every other player reveals cards from their deck until they reveal the named card.
They discard it or put it on top of their deck, your choice.
They discard the other revealed cards.


OP imo… being able to make them miss their best card is just too good.

Quote
Ametrine
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least 4 cards in hand reveals a card from hand and either discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

Mild attack… not OP, seems fine.  Similar to aquamarine but no sifting benefit for player but more powerful attack.

Quote
Opal
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may reveal a Victory or Curse card from his hand. If he doesn't, he may immediately buy a Victory or Curse card, putting it in his hand. If he doesn't, he discards his hand.

Rules question.  Does he draw a new hand?  Is he allowed to play his treasure in order to buy a card?  Needs wording changes.

Quote
Peridot
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
+1 Buy
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and then puts it back. If the revealed card was not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck. 

Another copper based attack.  Seems okay and balanced.  Kept in check by not being stackable.

Quote
Spinel
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck and either trash it, discard it, or put it back.

Nice.  Simple.  Balanced.  I like it.


Quote
Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.

Cursing attack, allowing players a benefit as well.  Interesting and probably balanced by the ability to trash when played.

Quote
Melanite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top and bottom cards of your deck, then reveal a card from your hand. Place one of the revealed cards in your hand, one on top of your deck, and trash the remaining card.

Sifting power and trashing power.  This is a good card.  How good, I dunno, but pretty good.

Quote
Obsidian
$4 - Action
+$2
Gain a Silver.

Compare to JoaT.  Is $2 better than draw/sifting?  I dunno.. sometimes yes… sometimes no.  Probably balanced, but I think JoaT would be my choice.

Quote
Aventurine
$4 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a Victory card costing 5 or less.

Late game trashing for a free Duchy.  Compare to monument.  If you play it more than 3 times… I’d rather have monument. 

Quote
Dioptase
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.

This is a really good $5, especially with the VP.  Perhaps too good.

Quote
Ammolite
$4 - Action
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing less than the revealed card.


You need good VP to make it worthwhile… kinda like Explorer.  Seems fine, maybe a little underwhelming.  But being able to gain VP at end game makes it more powerful.


Quote
Tourmaline
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may trash a Copper.
Each other player may discard a Copper. If he does, he gains a Copper. Otherwise, he gains three Coppers.

So they can do all 3.  Hmmm… gotta think about this one more.  Gaining 3 copper seems a little extreme for a single play.  But it could only be 1… I dunno.  Hard to judge this card right off the bat.

Quote
Axinite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains two Estates or a Curse, his choice.

Not quite as good as Witch/Mountebank.  Once curses run, I will always gain 1 of those.


Bloodstone
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. You choose 1 for them to place of the bottom of their deck and put the other back. If any non-Victory cards are revealed, gain a copy of one non-Victory card revealed this way.

Needs to be reworded to fit dominion style.  Dangerous to play as you might hurt yourself.

Quote
Rhodonite
$5 - Action
+$2
+1 VP for every $4 you spend this turn, rounded down.

So unless you buy a province or better, it’s a monument.  Balanced or a tidge UP I would think.

Quote
Serpentine
$5 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.
If you discarded 1 or more cards, you may gain a Copper.
If you discarded 2 or more cards, you may gain a Silver.
If you discarded 3 or more cards, you may gain a Gold.
--
(Rule clarification: The Treasure-gaining clauses are independent. If you discard 3 cards you may gain any or all of Copper, Silver, and Gold.)

It’s alright.  Good sifting and setting up the next hand with a benefit for hitting lots of junk.  I’d call it balanced.

Quote
Hackmanite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Choose one of the following:
Gain a Copper, each other opponent gains a Curse;
Gain a Silver, each other opponent gains a Copper;
Gain a Gold, each other opponent gains a Silver.

Pick your poison.  Interesting idea.  I’d say this works as it is.

Quote
Amazonite
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.


Good BM enabler, similar to library.

Quote
Celestite
$5 - Action
+$2
Look through your discard pile and trash up to 2 cards from it.

Trash from the discard.  Giving $2 is a nice benefit at $5, especially with the high selectivity you can have with the trashing.

Quote
Howlite
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.

Compare to Haggler.  I’d say this is underpowered as it will take a long time to charge up your matt.

Quote
Kunzite
$5 - Action
+$2
You may discard a Victory card costing up to $6. If you do, gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the discarded card, putting it into your hand.

Not good… puts duchy rushing to a whole new level.  Very unbalanced.

Quote
Larimar
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.

Attack portion doesn’t make sense.  If they choose, they either take the good card or give you a bad card.  You’re attacking yourself or giving them free stuff!

Quote
Mica
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

Discard based sifters like this can be very very good in BM.  At a cost of $5, this one is probably balanced.

Quote
Brandburg
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.

So if you trash a copper, you gain nothing.  A reverse mine that is too underpowered to be $6 imo.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 09, 2012, 06:10:13 pm
One of these is mine.

Amber
$1 - Action
+$2
Discard a Treasure from your hand (or reveal a hand with no Treasure).
If you discarded any cards this way, +1 Card.

Not sure if the Treasure discard is meant to be a penalty.  Probably.  Not that interesting.

Quote
Carnelian
$1 - Action
+$2

Joke entry, I'm sure.

Quote
Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2

Also a joke, probably.

Quote
Jade
$2 - Action
+$2
You may gain a [This Card] in hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand.

Seems simple enough.  Not bad.

Quote
Agate
$2 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with fewer than 6 cards in hand gains a Copper in hand. If no player gains a Copper this way, discard this from play. Otherwise, play this again.

This is way too strong.  It is a $2 attack that junks up decks and gives you +$4.  If you can village+Militia/Margrave/Goons, then it actually gives you +$8 and dishes out 3 Coppers!

Quote
Onyx
$3 - Action
+$2
At the start of Clean-up this turn, choose up to two cards you have in play. For each you would discard from play this turn, shuffle it into your deck.

I think it is far too strong.  You could set up a Golden Deck with this SO quickly.  Open TR-Onyx.  When you play Onyx initially, start by topdecking itself.  When you find TR, TR-Onyx and topdeck both.  In the meanwhile, pick up just 2 Silvers.  When you run into those, you can TR-Onyx + 2 Silver and buy a Province.  Then topdeck TR-Onyx and the Silvers.  Repeat.  It would set up SO fast.

Edit: I misread this.  I thought it was topdecking, but it shuffles it into the deck.

Despite this change, the Golden Deck should still be doable; you just need to filter though your discard a bit.  Hm, I guess the TR might not pair up properly and get lost... and I guess you'd need KC or else that fourth card spot will eventually lead to a reshuffle.  OK, it's not so bad.

Quote
Pearl
$3 Action
+$2
You may choose to have each opponent draw a card.  If they do, +2VP.

This is way better than Monument, despite the card draw for opponents.

Quote
Jasper
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. He gains a number of Coppers equal to the number of Action cards revealed. Discard all revealed cards.

It just makes engines so sad.  However, I think this is OK.  I don't think it forces BM, it just really, really frustrates treasureless strategies.

Quote
Topaz
$3 - Action
+$2
Name a card costing up to $2 and then reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
If any copies of the named card are revealed, trash them and discard the rest.  Otherwise: Discard the revealed cards and gain a copy of the named card, putting it on top of your deck.

Strong early trasher; whiffing is pretty bad for you.  Late game you might be afraid to play it, except there is nothing preventing a player from naming, for example, Followers.  Then nothing will be trashed.  You probably won't be able to gain Followers, of course.  Probably too strong -- the early trashing is almost as good as Chapel, except you also get +$2 and will still be able to buy something that turn because you're not trashing out of hand.

Quote
Amethyst
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may discard a Treasure or Victory card; if he doesn't, he gains a Curse.

I'm not sure.  I think this should be $4, as it is comparable to Cutpurse except it can Curse, but can also be blocked by a VP card.  I don't know.

Quote
Sapphire
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.

I would say that this is weaker than Woodcutter.  The difference is that Woodcutter gives guaranteed +1 Buy, whereas Sapphire gives 0 or 2.  If you buy Woodcutter or Sapphire, you probably want the buys.  I don't think the possibility of 2 Buys makes up for the possibility of 0, because that second Buy is worth a lot less (you're less likely to need or use it).

Quote
Ruby
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.

A mini-Feast with money attached.  Might be nice for a 3/4 opening when there are some good 4s on the board?

Quote
Zircon
$3 - Action
+$2
Reveal two cards from your hand.  The player to your left chooses one of them for you to trash.

Other early game trashers tend to be faster (Chapel, Remake, Trading Post) while single-card trashers usually have bigger benefit (Salvager, Apprentice, Remodel) and can be used to good effect in the late game.  zircon will usually be a dead card in the late game, because you won't have two other cards in hand that you're willing to trash.  It seems too weak to me.

Quote
Alaxandrite
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Trash a card from your hand, then draw a card.
Each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting one (their choice) in their hand.

Way, way strong.  You must trash, which is usually a good thing.  You draw a card, which is also good.  You deal out a Mountebank attack?!  Too good.  That the opponents can get some benefit from it does not make up for the amount of junk you're dealing out.

Quote
Kyanite
$3 - Action
+$2
You may draw 3 cards. If you do, reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you to discard. Trash the other two.

Like Topaz, I think the trashing is too strong, because it doesn't eat up your hand like most trashers (Remake, chapel) but you are still trashing two at a time.  It doesn't hurt in the late game either, since the "draw 3, trash 2" is optional.

Quote
Citrine
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

I think this would be OK at $5.

Quote
Iolite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).

I've seen this idea in the forums before and I'm not a fan.  Killing action cards forces a BM strategy, and this card can stack the effect.  It might be interesting with the new Ruins cards though!  Discards an Action card or gains a Ruins... that would self-mitigate.  Hm.

Quote
Turquoise
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least five cards discards a Treasure card (or reveals a hand with no Treasure).

Like others have stated, this is too similar to Cutpurse.

Quote
Apatite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.

The submissions this time around seem to have a lot of Copper attacks.  The earlier copper gaining attacks were Agate (too strong), Jasper (I thought was OK) and Alaxandrite (too strong).  This was seems fine to me.

Quote
Beryl
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Draw 2 cards.
Discard 2 cards.
Everyone else discards a card and gains a Copper to their hand.

Very similar to Apatite, but they can discard anything (attack is slightly weaker) and it comes with card filtering.  The filtering is too strong at $4.

Quote
Aquamarine
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.

I think this is too strong.  It is similar to Pillage, with the following differences:

- extra bonuses for yourself (+$2, draw 1, put one back)
- not a one-shot
- opponents draw a card first
- the targeted attack puts back the card instead of discarding it

Might be OK at $5.

Quote
Chalcedony
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards 2 different named cards and gains a Copper.
(If the player reveals a hand of all the same cards, they discard only 1 card.)

I wish this were the name for my card, because "Chalcedony" is almost an anagram of "eHalcyon".  Granted, the name for my card is pretty good too.

This card is too strong.  The discard is almost always stronger than Militia (the restriction means you can't discard two Estates, or two Curses, or two Coppers; it limits choices), plus it's stackable, plus it's a junker.

Quote
Malachite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
When you play this card, you may trash it. If you do, +1 VP.
Each other player draws 2 cards, then shows you his hand. You may choose a card from each revealed hand costing up to $3 and trash it. Each other player then discards down to 4 cards in hand.
--
(Rules clarification: Attacked opponents do not see each others' hands.)

I guess this would mainly be used to trash opponent's Silvers and cheap Engine components?  Forcing trashes is already pretty strong, but to have it be targeted seems too much.  The $3 limit mitigates it somewhat, but not that much -- say goodbye to your favourable Hamlet split!  The VP gain feels out of place, but maybe it matches the hidden card name.

Quote
Garnet
$4 - Action
+$2
After playing this card, shuffle your discard pile and place it on top of your draw pile.

This seems pretty close to Chancellor, but with the potential for some more interesting tricks.  I wish there was a bit more to it, to enhance that side of it, like maybe a mini Cartographer effect before you put the discard on top.

Quote
Labradorite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck. Gain a card costing exactly $1 less.

I think this would be OK at $2.

Quote
Sunstone
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.
Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards.
Put all revealed Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order.
Put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.

Potentially good for setting up an engine or megaturn, though being terminal hurts it a little.  I kind of wonder if any new card types will be introduced in DA or Guilds that aren't addressed here.  The easy fix is to put the Treasure and Action parts first, and then say "discard all other revealed cards."

Quote
Moonstone
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Name a card.
Every other player reveals cards from their deck until they reveal the named card.
They discard it or put it on top of their deck, your choice.
They discard the other revealed cards.

I like this.  It could be really painful in skipping over opponent's power cards.  A very soft counter would be Tunnel, in that it would be rather risky for the Moonstone player to name anything else.  I wonder if it's too strong.  Maybe it should be $5?  Or would that be too weak?

I do wonder how political this can become with more than 2 players.  Suppose one opponent buys Mountebank, the other buys Witch.  Both have trashed away their starting Estates and no Curses have been played yet.  Which one do you call out?  All else equal, Mountebank probably hurts you more.  But maybe the person playing Witch is a much stronger player...

Quote
Ametrine
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least 4 cards in hand reveals a card from hand and either discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

A little mundane, but it works.  I do like the ability to choose Militia or Ghost Ship, but it's not a novel idea.

Quote
Opal
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may reveal a Victory or Curse card from his hand. If he doesn't, he may immediately buy a Victory or Curse card, putting it in his hand. If he doesn't, he discards his hand.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is played, each other player may play any number of Treasure cards from his hand, then buy a Victory or Curse card costing up to the total number of $ played. All Treasure cards played this way stay in play until that player's next Cleanup phase.)

Buying when it's not your turn doesn't make any sense.

PPE: with the clarification... um.   Still weird.  If the treasures stay in play, does that mean the player can use them again?  Then this card is often helpful to your opponents in the late game, especially if they have enough for a Province.  Even if the treasures no longer provide that coinage, you give opponents a chance to scoop an important VP card.

OTOH, it is too strong before that point.  You force opponents to buy VP, or gain a Curse, or discard their hand.  If they can only buy a cheap VP card, it's kind of like discarding your hand anyway.  So always take the Curse?  But then that's a $4 Curser there.

And then it's super swingy because it can be blocked by a card you start with.

It doesn't seem balanced, and letting opponents play cards and buy during YOUR turn is way too out there.

Now watch a card like that appear in tomorrow's DA preview.

Quote
Peridot
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
+1 Buy
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and then puts it back. If the revealed card was not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

It is similar to Sea Hag except it stacks worse, giving Copper instead of Curse, and it's a Woodcutter.  I think the attack portion is fine, but the benefit is still too strong for $4.  OTOH, it's too weak for $5.  Losing the +Buy would be good, I think.

Quote
Spinel
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck and either trash it, discard it, or put it back.

Kind of boring.  Might be good at $3, though $4 is OK too.

Quote
Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.

The other $4 cursers are YW and Hag.  YW does card filtering and comes with a Bane.  Hag doesn't benefit you at all.  This one benefits you but also your opponents.  The benefit is actually pretty nice for them, allowing them to trash curses they already have, or draw an extra card.  It sounds balanced and looks pretty good.

...having two cursers in a set is OK, right?

Quote
Melanite
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top and bottom cards of your deck, then reveal a card from your hand. Place one of the revealed cards in your hand, one on top of your deck, and trash the remaining card.

It's kind of a non-terminal silver mix of Pearl Diver and Lookout.  Seems OK to me.

Quote
Obsidian
$4 - Action
+$2
Gain a Silver.

I don't think this very interesting.

Quote
Aventurine
$4 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a Victory card costing 5 or less.

Alright.

Quote
Dioptase
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.

But for the abuse cases, seems OK...  I'm not sure if the abuse cases are THAT bad, since the VP isn't even guaranteed.  Hm.  Still, terminal silver AND the card filtering is strong enough that the VP bonus is too much for $5.

Quote
Ammolite
$4 - Action
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing less than the revealed card.

Does this compare to Explorer?  If all you have are Estates, all this really does is give you the +$2.  With something like Tunnel, you might be able to get some nice cheap cards (Hamlet!).  With Hamlet, SR, Duchy, etc. you are able to gain Silver and a host of other potentially useful cards.  Province nets a Gold.  Colony nets a Platinum!

But it isn't restricted to treasure.  It can also net important action cards, or even more green.  The latter point makes this really good for SR games.  Reveal Duchy, gain SR.  Reveal SR, gain Estate.

I like it, but I think it might be undercosted a bit.

Quote
Tourmaline
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may trash a Copper.
Each other player may discard a Copper. If he does, he gains a Copper. Otherwise, he gains three Coppers.

Comparable to Mountebank, I suppose.  The optional Copper trash might be a trap.  Options:

Trash and discard.  Net gain -$2 (from the trashed and discarded Coppers), -1 Copper from deck.
Trash only.  Net gain -$1, +2 Coppers.
Discard only.  Net gain -$1, +1 Copper.
Neither trash nor discard.  Net gain +3 Copper.

Yeah, trashing is a trap if you don't also discard.

Not sure if this is too strong.  Mountebank's Curse discard typically doesn't hurt your next hand, but discarding/trashing Copper actually does.  Trashing is often helpful in the long run though... eh.  I don't know.

Quote
Axinite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains two Estates or a Curse, his choice.

Tough choice!  I'd probably take the Curse most of the time, I think.  Estates would run out fast though, especially with more than two players.

Quote
Bloodstone
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. You choose 1 for them to place of the bottom of their deck and put the other back. If any non-Victory cards are revealed, gain a copy of one non-Victory card revealed this way.

The non-VP gaining portion is so much worse than Jester.  If you hit something bad (Copper, Curse) you still have to take it yourself.

Quote
Rhodonite
$5 - Action
+$2
+1 VP for every $4 you spend this turn, rounded down.

This seems OK to me.  You're probably going to get at least 1VP out of it, in which case it's like Monument.  Sometimes you get a few more VP, in which case it's like Goons.  It also doesn't combo with cost reducers.

Oh, but wait.  The effect can be throned and KC'd... OK, that would make it too strong.

Quote
Serpentine
$5 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.
If you discarded 1 or more cards, you may gain a Copper.
If you discarded 2 or more cards, you may gain a Silver.
If you discarded 3 or more cards, you may gain a Gold.
--
(Rule clarification: The Treasure-gaining clauses are independent. If you discard 3 cards you may gain any or all of Copper, Silver, and Gold.)

This card really wants you to green fast.

Quote
Hackmanite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Choose one of the following:
Gain a Copper, each other opponent gains a Curse;
Gain a Silver, each other opponent gains a Copper;
Gain a Gold, each other opponent gains a Silver.

Quite interesting.  Looks good to me.

Quote
Amazonite
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.

Library-Cellar combo?  Not sure if it would tend to be stronger or weaker than Library.  It would leave you with a smaller hand, unless you have other support.  Hm.

Quote
Celestite
$5 - Action
+$2
Look through your discard pile and trash up to 2 cards from it.

I suppose I know whose this is. :P

Seems OK to me.

Quote
Howlite
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.

The first time I read this, I thought the "gained a Victory card" included purchases in the Buy phase.  If it only refers to gaining with the card, that's a bit better.  It would usually take too long to build up to a good level though.  But hey, it might actually be quite strong on some boards, if there is a lot of non-VP stuff you want to gain.

Quote
Kunzite
$5 - Action
+$2
You may discard a Victory card costing up to $6. If you do, gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the discarded card, putting it into your hand.

Isn't this too strong?  It seems strong to me, but maybe I'm crazy.

At the very least, this could facilitate an amazing KC megaturn.  So that's interesting.

Quote
Larimar
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.

It's kind of like... you gain a card, and then every opponent flips that card with Jester.  Weird.

Quote
Mica
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

Properly priced for the filtering it gives. :P

But WW brings up a good point that the effect is worse than Vault.  Hm.

Quote
Brandburg
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.

Would this be too strong for $5?  I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: One Armed Man on August 09, 2012, 06:14:35 pm
Amber
It is difficult to determine the use of this. It gives you a replacement card for a copper (hopefully), and that card could be a copper (good blah), action(uggh), victory card (bad blah), or better treasure (yay). Also, if you have village and then this, you are happier about drawing an action. It seems balanced, but it creates a negative feeling too much of the time.

Carnelian
Too cheap

Emerald
Too expensive. Hah

Jade
This seems too strong for $2. As long as you have the cards in hand to pull this off, it is like a Diadem. A Bazaar Jade opening could lead to a turn 3 of: Bazaar, Jade, trashing Estate, Jade, trashing Estate or Copper, play Copper Copper. Buy Bazaar. Your deck is now B+B+J+J+J+C+C+C+C+C+C+E+(C/E) after turn 3.

Agate
Village, Militia, Agate? Then you get $8 even without the other cards in your hand. For $2, no.

Onyx
Shuffling doesn't make me happy usually. From a balance prospective I would rather it say shuffle than bottom of the deck. This card is a terminal and shuffles at the end of the turn, so I am okay with thinking of it as ann Inn or something. Seems okay.

Pearl
Such a strange bonus. 3 cost seems a little low to let everyone draw a card, but this is a terminal. Council Room, Governor, and Vault let them do that for 5. Drawing cards can make everything go fast; +VPs make the game slow. This might fit right in the middle.

Jasper
Hurting other people based on how Action-heavy their deck is? You are already hurting them a bit by discarding their Action cards and then you hit them with Copper. That seems harsh. It can give 2 pieces of junk per hit like a 3 cost Mountebank.

Topaz
2 points of this card: name Copper/Estate/Curse and hope you trash something; name a 2 cost you don't think you have on your deck (Hamlet, Crossroads, Lighthouse) and gain it. You can potentially get very lucky with this thing; the first benefit might need to be tuned down. Seems okay.

Amethyst
No. As a curser it is too cheap. It doesn't scale well for multiplayer games. It is too strong.

Sapphire
A little contest and the reward is +2 buys? What if you don't want that? How often is this better than weak card Woodcutter. A better version might draw the card into your hand if it is cheaper.

Ruby
This card lets you get a pseudo-4/4 opening whereas feast lets you get 5/3. It also is an alt-vp enabler or a terminal silver that turns into a cantrip once you have acquired all the Attacks you can handle. Seems fun.

Zircon
If you don't have 2 cards you want to trash, you don't want to even play this. This leaves Estates/ Curses stuffing your deck. This makes this card an awkward, weaker Moneylender.

Alaxandrite
This is extremely strong at 3 or practically any cost. This is better than mountebank.

Kyanite
Another Zircon-like card that makes you expose cards to your opponent's trashing grips. In multiplayer, this can lead to too much collaberation. This one is too strong.

Citrine
Too strong. Mica is closer to the right power level. This is a much, much better woodcutter since it is most of a Young Witch.

Iolite
The best counter to itself. It crushes engines and makes you want to play Big Money. These I don't like. See Cavalry from the "Strife" expansion, which takes out Attacks. It does so in a way that is a bit friendlier since the card is a cantrip that cost 5.

Turquoise
This is way too similar to a Cutpurse, especially on the surface. In 2-player it is better since it takes out unlucky Golds and Silvers. It does lead to a different counter. If opponent gets Cutpurse, you trash Coppers. If opponent gets Turquoise, you never buy high cost treasure.

Apatite
Unlike Turqoise, your opponent can discard dead terminals if they like. This can hit you more than once in multiplayer, but at that point it reads "Each other player gains a Copper", which is decently nasty for a $4 terminal silver attack. On its very first play is the only time it possibly causes any damage. It is cool if you can follow Militia up with this, but not overpowering. Seems okay.

Beryl
This is Apatite with a tacked on Young Witch. I like Apatite better since this one is too strong for the same reason Citrine is.

Aquamarine
In multiplayer, it is a game of, "No, Steve should put the Gold back" "He should put the Mountebank back". Haha. All the attack does is screw up engines by top-decking villages and make cards occassionally miss the reshuffle. For a card that could be played so often, I don't like thinking about how I can give a player exactly $7 in their hand so they can't get a Province or put an Estate back so they have $11 in hand with no buy. Doing that so many times in a multiplayer game would be weird. How about they put the most expensive card they reveal back and they choose in case of a tie? That (weaker) card could get some other bonus and an increased cost. Also, our set already has a top-deck attack.
The above was before I noticed you do this to yourself, too. A +$2, +1 card Mandarin is powerful at $4 without an attack. Too strong.

Chalcedony
This scales poorly for multiple plays. Players will have to discard their 2nd&3rd or 1st&2nd(tie) best cards on the second play too often.

Hematite
See my comments on Iolite.

Malachite
This is very similar to Monument late game. This is the point where the attack is weakest. An opponent with Gold Gold Province Copper Estate draws Silver Malachite. Then you trash their Silver, and they discard a Province and Estate. Now they have Gold Gold Malachite Copper. You kind of helped them. I can see why you want to get rid of this late game. I don't like how you can trash an opponent's 3-costs on turn 3 while giving yourself a big benefit.

Garnet
A Chancellor that favors the cards you bought last turn over the ones you buy this turn. Not worth $4.

Labradorite
This can accidently gain an Estate. It can also gain a Duchy or Gold (it seems like it does best with a 7 cost). Swingy, and often does nothing but reveal the card. In multiples, each play of it does the same thing. If it discarded the card, then you would feel less bad about hitting a crappy card and less good about hitting a great one.

Sunstone
Hey! That is my card! Mix/ Scribe from challenge 5. I did not submit this one. The only change is that Sunstone discards curses instead of trashing them. If this wins, should its submitter get credit for it or me?

Moonstone
A missile that gets rid of any card. It misses if the opponent has it in their hand. Seems political, especially if only one player has a power-curser so far and you want to get rid of it. I like that it is also a playable Fortune-teller side.

Ametrine
This is like a Militia. If an Estate is revealed, it is top-decked. In multiples, it is much better than militia, but only slightly better than Ghost ship. We already have a top-deck attack, but I prefer this to Aquamarine.

Opal
Immediately buy? As in spend Treasure from their hand? On your turn? This is too wacky for such a benign card.

Peridot
A Woodcutter that hands out Coppers ~50% of the time and doesn't work in multiples. It does a very little thing. I am confused as to whether I like this or not. Seems okay.

Spinel
Seems great, since it is a trasher that you don't have to worry about the card taking up a spot in your hand. A counter to Fortune Teller or Rabble. Such a good opener it seems obvious to open this in nearly every 4/3 (It competes with Jack). Too good compared to Loan, Money Lender, Develop, Spice Merchant, etc.

Tanzanite
We already have a 4 cost curser. This one seems a little too strong for $4. Even if you assume they already have a Curse in their hand, they had to have drawn it anyway (taking away a +1 card they would have drawn). As strong as Young Witch.

Melanite
This seems better than Spinel. You have the trashing choice between 7 cards rather than 3 (for lookout). Then you place another bad card on the bottom of your deck and a good card on the top. Needs to be +$1 or cost more.

Obsidian
Seems fine, but boring. The JOAT comparisons are obvious.

Aventurine
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a Victory card costing 5 or less.
Not exactly the same as a card talked about during the contest... Attribution issues aside, the things I said then apply now. Weaker than Monument except if you get the card late game. It almost occupies the same design space as this set's Tea House card. You buy it when you get $4 late game.

Dioptase
Too strong. I don't want any of this contest's Micas to win.

Ammolite
Potentially gain some Golds/Platinum/7 cost actions. Another reason to rush an expensive Victory than tournament. This is an improved (cost reduction) version of Explorer. Seems okay.

Tourmaline
Trash a copper (from their hand)? This attack can cause a Miltia-like effect. You would rather discard a Copper instead of trashing it if you only want to get rid of one, since discarding prevents you from gaining more. This can hand out 3 coppers, which is often worse than the impact of a Mountebank. This is like a Cutpurse where your opponent also gains a Copper. The card reads in an almost-confusing way.

Axinite
Giving the player the choice makes this almost strictly worse than Witch/Torturer/Mounteback. I would like weaker cursers, not strictly weaker ones.

Bloodstone
This needs a "you may" before the "gain a copy" line.

Rhodonite
Mostly the same as a Monument until you are able to buy a Province. This might need to say "When this is in play", not sure. Makes for an interesting Megaturn, but one that gives a huge point advantage while not necessarily making the game. It needs +buy unless you use it for 8 or higher cost cards. Seems okay.

Serpentine
You get a bigger advantage when you discard all your Victory and Curse? That is very swingy, especially gaining a Silver and a Gold. On a good day it is a little better than Jester. On a bad day it lets you rearrange the top of your deck, blah.

Hackmanite
Out of the choose a Treasure option cards from this contest, I like this one the best. It is cute and has a Governor-like option. The Silver option is an attack. A quirk that bothers me: if your opponent(s) has(ve) Moat, they probably have to reveal it before you make a call whether to give them a Silver.

Amazonite
A Library Cellar... I'd want to discard Coppers and terminals a lot of the time, so I would likely get better cards back. Seems okay.

Celestite
When this misses the shuffle, it is really crappy. Too swingy.

Howlite
A Pirate-Ship that seems okay for 2 Player. Similar to the Stockpile card from the "Strife" fan expansion. You need to play this quite a few times to get huge bonuses, long enough that you would be greening when you finished. If you play this 7 times in a game (with drawing/Kings Court/Throne Room/Scheme/buying 2), the best you can get is Duchy (for VP). If you play it 10 times, the best you can get is Province Duchy. 11 is Province Province, but only if you didn't get a Duchy when you had a chance to. A little mind game. You can also use this to gain a 2 or 3 cost action. Seems fun.

Kunzite
Expand is upset that this card is so much better. Apologize.

Larimar
An odd attack. The best thing to do is show your opponents a Silver (the weakest thing to reveal with a Jester). That is obvious and would get old quickly. There is probably a way to perfect this idea (Actions only maybe?)

Mica
The proper cost for this effect. The way these cards are in ascending order, this card is like a breath of fresh air. I think that gives it an advantage. In a vacuum, I wouldn't have thought of picking this as a winner. Vault isn't better. Vault has a benefit your opponents can get.

Brandburg
A minor punishment for the opponent having no Coppers. An attack that so often helps the opponent. Not what I want to wait until I get $6 for to grab a terminal silver. The opponent could also grab this card instead of a Gold so they don't have to risk losing a Gold. It is usually worth the risk because this card isn't good.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Polk5440 on August 09, 2012, 06:55:50 pm
My voting criteria for this challenge: If a card is "worse" than Emerald or Carnelian, I will not give it an approval vote.

In honor of the PGA Championship this weekend, if I like a card better than Emerald, I will deem it to have "made the cut" and I will think about approval voting (or better) from the set of cards that make the cut.

Carnelian
$1 - Action
+$2


Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2

For the sake of completeness, I actually like Emerald better than Carnelian and Duchess. With Duchess, it always slows the game down too much with all it's options that don't matter that much, and I would rather play with a weak straight up terminal silver at the same price in most games than it. With Carnelian, I would rather have Poor House as the $1 card that ruins my Remaking and Upgrading of Copper. And hey -- soon I'll get my wish!

The Sifters: Draw 2, Discard 2

Made the cut: Mica, Dioptase, Beryl
Missed the cut: Citrine

So better players than me think Mica is the balanced card here, huh? Well, I think it's too boring and I like Dioptase better. Yes, it's more powerful, but I am not convinced it's more powerful than other power 5s. And it looks like a lot of fun to play. There is an interesting dynamic here with only getting VP chips when you discard Copper: How much buying power to sacrifice for VP? If you have $8 in hand after the draw, do you discard two Coppers (if you have them) and pick up a Gold and 2 VP chips? Or buy the Province?

Quote
Dioptase
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.

Announcer: Too much green clogging up your engine?
Sad Person: (nods and pouts)
Announcer: How would you like an Invisible Estate?
Person, now Happy: (Smiles and nods)
Announcer: Introducing: The Invisible Estate! It gives you all the VP benefits of a regular Estate without all the deck clog! Amazing! It must be really pricy right? Got some extra money in hand? Well, have I got a deal for you! For the price of a regular Estate, you can have the brand new Invisible Estate instead! And you don't even need an extra Buy!
Person: Wow! Sounds like a great deal! But I don't know...
Announcer: But wait, there's more! For a limited time only, Invisible Estates are half price! If you vote now, you can get Invisible Estates on every turn you play this card for just $1! It's such a good deal, some are calling it toooooo good!
Voice Over, spoken artificially quickly: Restrictions Apply. Limit 2 Invisible Estates per person per turn. You must have a Dioptase in play to purchase. Only Copper is accepted as payment.

Quote
Beryl
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Draw 2 cards.
Discard 2 cards.
Everyone else discards a card and gains a Copper to their hand.

I also like Beryl. I think the attack is more interesting than Young Witch. Maybe too much power for $4, but I like the concept of this card. I am all for more attacks that clog other peoples' engines.

Cheap Cards

Missed the Cut: Amber, Agate, and Jade.

Attacks

Made the Cut: Amethyst, Apatite, Iolite, Tanzanite, Hackmanite, Jasper, Aquamarine

Missed the Cut: Turquoise (too similar to Cutpurse), Brandburg (a Saboteur for Treasure in Hand for $6? ehck...), Chalcedony (worse than Militia much of the time), Moonstone (too much like a political Fortune Teller for my taste), Bloodstone (I'd rather just play with Jester), Opal (an out of place buy phase? Sounds too much like my least favorite card ever, Black Market), Malachite (too much going on), Peridot (too much like Sea Hag, which I don't really care for), Larimar (shouldn't be an attack, would play too slowly; I would rather play with Jester), Tourmaline (unfun Copper flood), Ametrine (doesn't seem that fun), Axinite (would rather just have Mountebank),  Alaxandrite (I wish this didn't have the last sentence. Otherwise, I would like it. Too strong.).

As you can see, I am not that fond of attacks.

Quote
Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.

I like this style of attack: Positive and negative externalities! And not too many choices that it would slow the game down. Slick. One of the few attacks submitted that actually feels like the +$2 belongs for balance and style and isn't just stuck there as a requirement of the contest.

Quote
Hackmanite
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Choose one of the following:
Gain a Copper, each other opponent gains a Curse;
Gain a Silver, each other opponent gains a Copper;
Gain a Gold, each other opponent gains a Silver.

I like the choice of attack or benefit, but on a first read, it doesn't quite excite me like Tanzanite did.


Quote
Iolite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).

Apatite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.

Amethyst
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may discard a Treasure or Victory card; if he doesn't, he gains a Curse.

I like these discard attacks. I like that Iolite is nice and simple, but I also like that Amethyst and Apatite have clogging potential without being overpowered. Apatite's clogging with Coppers is a good idea in my book. Scrying Pool engine builders should have to think twice more often. And Coppers don't run out as quickly as Curses! I like that Copper clogs are different than Curse clogs. Copper at least helps you buy things, and there's a couple of different ways of dealing with Coppers (Loan and Mint) that doesn't apply to Curses. So the fact they clog differently is interesting.

Quote
Jasper
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. He gains a number of Coppers equal to the number of Action cards revealed. Discard all revealed cards.

Another Copper clog.

I am a little concerned that cards that deal out so many Coppers (like Apatite and Jasper) without also giving engine builders a way to deal with so much clog could be uninteresting in too many games (remove multiple paths to victory). I am also holding onto my own version of Copper clog for a future contest which I like a whole lot better than any of these. So I like the idea but am a little biased against these particular cards for that reason.

Quote
Aquamarine
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.

I think I like it, but I worry that it would play too slowly or be too uninteresting. I don't know if everyone would like revealing their hands all the time, either. Some revealing is tolerable, but hands are supposed to be private information most of the time!

The Rest

Good grief, there's more entries every week! I Will think about the rest later....
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 09, 2012, 06:58:20 pm
Thoughts on every other one, chosen to skip mine:

Quote
Amber
$1 - Action
+$2
Discard a Treasure from your hand (or reveal a hand with no Treasure).
If you discarded any cards this way, +1 Card.

Since the discard is compulsory, this is not as powerful as it looks. It's actually likely to bite you in BM. In an engine, drawing a card to replace your Copper in hand is worth about as much as discarding a Copper off your deck, I guess... so a nice lubricant if there is no or bad trashing, but the price point means you can't really get it early unless you open 5/2...

Actually, wait! By analogy with Poor House, I guess you could play a Remake-Amber strategy, aiming to get rid of all the Copper and forsake the potential +1 Card. You get +$2 each instead of the up to $4 of Poor House, but it's non-terminal meaning that you don't need Villages. So it's probably a little easier to set up. Hmm.

Quote
Emerald
$2 - Action
+$2

Lol. Strictly less interesting than Duchess. Pass.

Quote
Agate
$2 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with fewer than 6 cards in hand gains a Copper in hand. If no player gains a Copper this way, discard this from play. Otherwise, play this again.

Way too strong. Compare Duchess; the Spy effect is pretty much a wash, and being able to gain it with Duchies is pretty minor compared to basically any kind of Attack worth mentioning. And this is potentially a very strong attack! I can see Village-Militia-Agate causing some ragequits. Not to mention what happens if you toss it into Torturer chains. Oh man. That might be more of a "threat is stronger than the execution" thing, but if you convince opponents to always take Curses because of the threat of getting triple- or quintuple-Coppered, then you've effectively just turned your Torturers into almost strictly better Witches.

Quote
Pearl
$3 Action
+$2
You may choose to have each opponent draw a card.  If they do, +2VP.

So, a super-Monument with an externality. I think the effect of the externality is being overestimated here and that this can cost $4 (consider Smithy/Council Room, and the value of the +1 Buy), and then it just looks awkward next to an ordinary Monument.

Quote
Topaz
$3 - Action
+$2
Name a card costing up to $2 and then reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
If any copies of the named card are revealed, trash them and discard the rest.  Otherwise: Discard the revealed cards and gain a copy of the named card, putting it on top of your deck.

So maybe if you're trying to empty a stack of Pawn or Haven or something to power up Cities, this could be kind of interesting although hard to use. In the ordinary case, it's obviously meant to trash your starting Coppers and Estates, up to 3 at a time. If it could reliably do that and also give +$2, it'd clearly be too powerful at $3, so the idea is to balance it by having a chance to get one back instead. I don't think that really works out, though. You could open Topaz/Topaz and do a fair amount of trashing in turns 3 and 4 if they don't collide (about as much as with 1 Chapel use, on average, I guess), and get +$2 on both those turns as well which could get 2 early Silvers or something like that. And then like with Chapel, you could more or less put them away. But then, now you have 2 dead cards instead of 1, and the 30% chance collision really hurts... hmm. This is probably actually OK.

Quote
Sapphire
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.

Power to the Pawns! Clearly Woodcutter was used as a reference point for balancing this. It seems worse on average: getting the second additional buy is often much less important than the first, and in multiplayer, your EV for # of buys credited will go down as there are more opponents who can beat you. And Woodcutter is already seen as fairly low tier. Pass.

Quote
Zircon
$3 - Action
+$2
Reveal two cards from your hand.  The player to your left chooses one of them for you to trash.

I think I would choose this over Steward almost every time. The thing about $3 cards is that their frequency of purchase is generally much higher near the beginning of the game, when they're worth purchasing; accordingly, $3s that are powerful early are powerful full stop. And, early, I can basically always find 2 of {Copper, Estate} to reveal.

Quote
Kyanite
$3 - Action
+$2
You may draw 3 cards. If you do, reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you to discard. Trash the other two.

Whoo boy. Same comment as above, but more so. The vanilla bonus is whatever, but the mechanic takes everything that's wrong with Lookout and makes it ten times worse. Early, it's a crazy powerhouse (compare to Topaz - this one will always trash 2 cards, Topaz needs a little luck to trash 2 and a lot of luck to trash 3) and late it's unplayable (with Topaz, you're fairly safe if, say, Pawn is in the kingdom; most of the time it doesn't really matter if you either trash or gain one since they're playable as do-nothing cantrips).

Quote
Iolite (also Hematite, lol)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).

An anti-engine Cutpurse. Neat concept. But unless the potential engines on board are quite strong, opponents can just counter by going BM, and an Iolite-BM mirror match is basically a BM mirror match. The idea is so simple and yet so promising, and yet I can tell it needs work.

Quote
Apatite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.

Weak-ish attack now (compare to Militia: you lose only 1 card, and you get to replace it with Copper at least - sure, it has to be a non-Victory card, but early on this is basically no attack, since you'll almost always have a Copper) + weak-ish attack ongoing (compare Mountebank: don't gain a Curse with the copper, and it's in hand where you have the chance to trash it, though you don't get to discard a Curse to defend) = balanced? I suspect it is. It also apparently gets stronger over time, and a lot of ordinary attacks don't do that (cursers add a card to an expanding deck, for progressively less marginal effect; discard attacks vary over time depending on greening conditions; Ambassador can run out of stuff to give you). I like this one. I think I really like it.

Quote
Aquamarine
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.

This seems really really weak. When the attack returns cards to the deck, I think it doesn't matter as much whose choice it is what gets returned. This doesn't reduce hand size, it potentially puts good cards into opponent's hands, basically all the damage it can do against BM is to put an Estate in the player's next hand from the current one. Again I guess this is more anti-engine; in the best case scenario, opponent holds, say, Village-Smithy, draws a Smithy and you make him return the Village. But yeah I'm pretty much 100% sure Militia-BM does way better against plain BM than Aquamarine-BM does.

Quote
Garnet
$4 - Action
+$2
After playing this card, shuffle your discard pile and place it on top of your draw pile.

Well, I guess that's stronger than Chancellor, but Chancellor is already seen as a weak $3 and this isn't a huge improvement. Tack on a +Buy and I'd think about it.

Quote
Sunstone
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.
Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards.
Put all revealed Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order.
Put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.

Didn't we already have this in the deck improver challenge? The sorting is weird; if I don't want the Treasure in my next hand, I don't want it at all. Bottom-decking it is just awkward and seems like it's intended more for the novelty than anything else. That said, it looks better than Scout and worse than, say, Cartographer, so it's probably at least balanced. But I don't like it.

Quote
Ametrine
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least 4 cards in hand reveals a card from hand and either discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

Ooh. Mind games. I guess it could get political ("Why did you discard his Curse and topdeck mine?") but no more so than Swindler. It's hard to pick something where you're indifferent to whether it gets topdecked or discarded (Pawn? GH?). Anyway this seems to avoid the standard traps in designing Attack cards, and seems like the right strength of Attack for a $4, so I approve.

Quote
Peridot
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
+1 Buy
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and then puts it back. If the revealed card was not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

A copper-er. Interesting. Not sure what the +Buy is doing here.

Quote
Tanzanite
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.

... This is just weird. I don't think I can evaluate it properly. It definitely gets weaker as the game progresses, as opponents become more likely to have a Curse in hand - at which point the attack has basically no effect until the pile runs out, and then it starts being a boon to opponents instead of an attack. It would be nice to have a way to do something useful with the card when that happens.

Quote
Obsidian
$4 - Action
+$2
Gain a Silver.

That is basically the same as "Gain a silver in hand", carefully skirting around the rules. ;) So this is like Explorer without the option to reveal a Province. The $4-$5 power gap is supposed to be fairly big, so I conclude that this is probably too strong. I could be convinced otherwise, but I can't approve this one anyway; it's honestly pretty boring.

Quote
Dioptase
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.

Strictly more powerful than Mica. ;) Ok, well, I see what everyone else was saying about Mica now... the filtering is basically going to add $1 or so of value to your hand on average, and $5 is a fine price for what becomes approximately a terminal Gold. So if that's correctly costed, then this is clearly overpowered.

I'm a fan of the underlying idea, though. I think it gives you the correct amount of VP on average, for the price, compared to Monument. So... say we changed it to "Reveal and discard 2 cards...."? I could get behind the resulting card, yeah. Except, then, you have to keep your Coppers, and actually it gets worse over time as you buy other interesting stuff. Eventually it would fall behind Monument, even. What a pity.

Quote
Tourmaline
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may trash a Copper.
Each other player may discard a Copper. If he does, he gains a Copper. Otherwise, he gains three Coppers.

Ouch! So if I have 2 coppers in hand, I effectively get double-Cutpursed, or triple-Coppered, or Cutpursed-and-Coppered. (I could trash and then not discard, to get Cutpursed-and-double-Coppered; but if I prefer that to gaining a single Copper, like because of Counting House or something, then I'd just take the triple-Copper option.) Quite the dilemma. If I don't have those Coppers in hand then I just lose options. Strong attack no matter how you cut it.

Quote
Bloodstone
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. You choose 1 for them to place of the bottom of their deck and put the other back. If any non-Victory cards are revealed, gain a copy of one non-Victory card revealed this way.

An attack that hurts a little, but helps you a lot. Interesting.

Quote
Serpentine
$5 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.
If you discarded 1 or more cards, you may gain a Copper.
If you discarded 2 or more cards, you may gain a Silver.
If you discarded 3 or more cards, you may gain a Gold.
--
(Rule clarification: The Treasure-gaining clauses are independent. If you discard 3 cards you may gain any or all of Copper, Silver, and Gold.)

So the worse your deck is, the more help you get. If you discard 2 cards, then you effectively get silver-in-hand (assuming you don't want to gain the Copper as well); if you discard 3 cards, you get silver-in-hand plus gold-in-discard, which is probably a little better than gold-in-hand on average, but maybe not. Compared to Explorer, this has a lot more flavour and seems competitive in power level. I like it.

Quote
Amazonite
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.

Library-ish draw, to 2 fewer cards in typical situations, getting $2 instead. I guess compared to Library it's weaker in BM, stronger in engines, unless maybe if your villages are Hamlet or FV.

Quote
Howlite
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.

I assume that should be "[This Card] mat". Once it's powered up, it gets a Province every third time; seen another way, FV-FV-Howlite-Howlite-Howlite eventually gets two Provinces. So, potentially very powerful, but you really need to be able to draw your deck to (a) play it enough times and then (b) line everything up. Nice on Buy-less boards, though. Maybe try it with Chapel + Xroads?

Quote
Larimar
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.

Well... the top of your discard pile is where gained cards normally go anyway, so I'm not really sure what's going on here. That sounds like a clumsy attempt to avoid losing track of the gained card. Anyway, the attack portion could get a bit political I guess ("Why didn't *you* make him take the extra Forge instead of getting one for yourself?"). But more than that, this is just really tricky. You'd never really want to reveal a terminal in a multiplayer game, and you can't reveal anything too good, or too bad. The attack portion just seems unworkable. Other than that, this is Workshop with a +$2 attached, which is not especially interesting.

Quote
Brandburg
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.

So... an attack that anti-Mines the opponents. Basically as good as playing Mine yourself, but only if you hit a Silver or better in everyone else's hand. If you do, well, Mine with a +$2 attached is really really good for a $6 card. If you don't, then it gets proportionately worse... so it's swingy, and more likely to be too weak than too strong (although when it's too strong, it feels awesome), and is worse in multiplayer games. Again, full marks for creativity but it needs some work.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tables on August 09, 2012, 06:58:54 pm
I once played with a card very very similar to Garnet. The only difference was it discarded the rest of your deck before putting what WAS your discard pile onto your deck (shuffled). Sounds like a big difference, but it isn't, because you almost never see those cards. The idea is, you pick up two Garnets and just build your deck up. Then, you just start playing them as you see them. Very quickly, you have more or less two very small piles of cards you're alternating between using, each of which has a Garnet in, and meanwhile, Victory cards you buy mostly get buried into the third pile (the rest of your deck in this case), letting you green quite consistently.

Hmm... It was a long while ago since I played this card, so I'm not sure exactly what I did to make this work. But it was pretty much BM+This card, so I know it doesn't take enablers, and basically trashed any other BM on the board. Maybe there was something subtle that was the problem, but... eh.

Chalcedony, as people have pointed out, is ridiculous. It's basically Militia (one of the stronger $4's) at $4, except the opponent has less choice about what to discard, and the discard stacks, and they also get junk thrown into their deck. At $5, this card would be overpowered. At $6 I think it'd be competitive.

Finally I've read most of the comments and I think a few people are misreading some cards. Some of them are pretty confusing rules wise, like Opal, but then I think e.g. some people misread Onyx's shuffle-into-deck as topdecking.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 09, 2012, 07:12:52 pm
It's basically Militia (one of the stronger $4's)

Come to think of it, my analysis is guilty of comparing the attacks that work more like Militia to Militia, while comparing the attacks that work more like Cutpurse to Cutpurse. And I guess if Militia and Cutpurse were out, I would personally always take Militia... I mean I'm sure there are spots where Cutpurse would be stronger, but I don't think I'm good enough to spot them :/
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Polk5440 on August 09, 2012, 09:28:54 pm
...A continuation of my previous post.

Trash &/or Gain

Made the Cut: Ruby, Aventurine, Zircon (I do like Zircon more than Kyanite, but it's a weak trasher that doesn't excite me quite as much as some other cards), and Topaz (a safer Lookout, but seems like too strong of a trasher for $3), Obsidian (nice, but hard to get priced right since it's so much like a boring Explorer), Kunzite (I feel like this should read "you may trash a Victory card" instead).   

Missed the Cut: Kyanite, Howlite, Spinel (I wish the ability was a replacement for Spy's ability. Actually, it might just make a good house rule for Spy. It doesn't seem to fit on a terminal silver), and Celestite (I always shuffle Counting Houses to the top of the deck; I'm sure I'd have the same bad luck with this one), Labradorite, Ammolite (mid and late game it seems like it would be a lot better than Haggler which makes nervous)

Quote
Ruby
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.

I like Ruby the best out of all the cards in this category. Like others have said, it's a mini-Feast (and one that I would actually play!). I like Aventurine as well, but not as much as Ruby.

Improve the Top of Your Deck (Again)

Made the Cut: Sunstone (I like this better than Serpentine), Melanite (I think I would prefer this over Lookout in most kingdoms)

Missed the Cut: Garnet, Onyx (too much shuffling), Serpentine,

I'm not sure if these ideas are good enough to win in the terminal silver category....

Odds and Ends

Made the Cut: Amazonite, Sapphire

Missed the Cut: Rhodonite (why is this incentive interesting? Why not just play with Monument? I would just buy stuff anyway...), Pearl (!),
 
Quote
Amazonite
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.

I like the Library x Cellar mechanic here.

Quote
Sapphire
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.

I like the idea of a bonus being random and the interaction (in the Tribute family, I guess), but I don't know if this is the most interesting implementation.


Lots of fun cards this time around. I submitted a card to the contest, but I didn't have any good ideas, so I am enjoying reading other people's good ones.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 09, 2012, 09:44:58 pm
Can I withdraw my entry?  It might be a good idea for that to be an option to be considered for everyone.  My entry for the terminal silver competition was last second and on second thought, was not worth sending in.  When there are so many entries to consider, adding effort to discussion and voting, it seems like it would be useful for my card to be removed from the ballot.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 09, 2012, 10:04:43 pm
I once played with a card very very similar to Garnet. The only difference was it discarded the rest of your deck before putting what WAS your discard pile onto your deck (shuffled). Sounds like a big difference, but it isn't, because you almost never see those cards. The idea is, you pick up two Garnets and just build your deck up. Then, you just start playing them as you see them. Very quickly, you have more or less two very small piles of cards you're alternating between using, each of which has a Garnet in, and meanwhile, Victory cards you buy mostly get buried into the third pile (the rest of your deck in this case), letting you green quite consistently.

Hmm... It was a long while ago since I played this card, so I'm not sure exactly what I did to make this work. But it was pretty much BM+This card, so I know it doesn't take enablers, and basically trashed any other BM on the board. Maybe there was something subtle that was the problem, but... eh.

[snip]

Finally I've read most of the comments and I think a few people are misreading some cards. Some of them are pretty confusing rules wise, like Opal, but then I think e.g. some people misread Onyx's shuffle-into-deck as topdecking.

How does this Garnet strategy work?  Wouldn't the Victory cards you gain get shuffled and topdecked?  How would they end up buried in a third pile?

I did misread Onyx.  OK, it's more reasonable, but you should still be able to get it into a Golden Deck scenario.  It's just a little extra work to filter everything else into the discard first.  I think it would still be too easy to do.

Edit: Upon further reflection, I retract the statement.  The Golden Deck would be tricky to set up because requisite cards might not match up with the Onyx.  Also, KC would be needed over TR because Onyx-ing four cards leaves a fifth spot that eventually leads to a reshuffle (though other cards could fill in -- Scheme, for instance, but then there are already TR/KC-Scheme shenanigans).
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: One Armed Man on August 09, 2012, 10:05:38 pm
Mine had a terrible mistake on it that I didn't notice until it was posted about. I am upset about it, but what can I do... I can root for my potion card!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: DWetzel on August 09, 2012, 10:38:05 pm
Can I withdraw my entry?  It might be a good idea for that to be an option to be considered for everyone.  My entry for the terminal silver competition was last second and on second thought, was not worth sending in.  When there are so many entries to consider, adding effort to discussion and voting, it seems like it would be useful for my card to be removed from the ballot.

Oh, no, you get to suffer with the rest of us losers!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Titandrake on August 09, 2012, 11:52:00 pm
I think once you're on the ballot, you can't withdraw. Just in case some votes are conditional on certain cards existing. E.g., someone might vote for the $1 cost +$2 over the $2 cost, and if the $1 cost didn't exist they would vote for the $2 cost because the idea is silly enough to vote for. Who knows
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Robz888 on August 10, 2012, 01:01:20 am
In trying to adjust for one problem with my card, I created a huge other problem that I didn't realize. Yeah, my card is awful!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 10, 2012, 01:17:20 am
Thoughts on every other one, chosen to skip mine:

Hey, even though you only gave thoughts on every other card, did you look at all of them anyway?  Because in at least one of the two contests, you skipped mine and I hope it gets a fair shot. ;)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: nopawnsintended on August 10, 2012, 02:03:39 am
I'm limiting to cards that give me a favorable impression this week (obviously, one of the cards is mine).  Unlike others, I like the sifting dynamic.

Topaz has an interesting dynamic. Could use to trash Coppers and Estates, but could also gain some power $2 cost cards (lighthouse, courtyard).

Citrine: I like the idea, but the price isn't right at $4.  +1 Buy and 2 cards of sift on a terminal $2 is much stronger than $4 cost should be.

Beryl: Copper "attack" on the same idea.  At $4, underpriced for the same reason as Citrine.

Garnet: A better Chancellor if you want to "activate" it.  Suppose that you've played all of your good cards.  Wouldn't it be great to put those good cards back on top of the deck without shuffling in the junk at the bottom?  Garnet does that.  One question / clarification I'd have is whether Garnet would trigger a Stash reshuffle.  That is, can I put the Stashes atop the deck too?  I think, maybe… so this should be better than Chancellor… not sure how much better.  I like trying to make Chancellor better.

Ametrine: A weird mix between a soft Militia and a Bureaucrat that gives one shot terminal silver now instead of Silver on deck.  It is weird, but interesting.

Spinel:  Initially, I read this as lookout, but with +$2 instead of +1 Card, +1 Action.  Not the right way to think about it.  This is a better self-spy.  I think I like it.

Dioptase: I like it.  It is a little strong at $5 with the VP option, but note that getting VP is going to cost in spending power.  I think Polk5440 sums up my sentiment w/ respect to the card.  I don't think it is right to think of the VP option as "free"... you don't always get 2VP with this card.  Conditions apply, which could lead to some interesting choices.

Rhondonite: I like the idea of an alternate Monument, but I think this could be ambiguous as worded.  "Every $4 you spend this turn" could be "Every $4 in cost among cards you bought this turn."  Other than that, I like it.

Mica: I like the 2-card sifting mechanic, but I think this one is boring relative to the other options with sifting.  In particular, some have compared Mica to Vault saying that it is a weak $5.  Others have said that it is priced right at $5.  I think both of these comments are right.  It is a relatively weak $5.… so it feels like it needs a little more for my taste (I like strong $5 cost cards).

Looking back at these comments, I guess I don't like attacks.  Personal preference I guess, but what can I say?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Davio on August 10, 2012, 03:26:13 am
Finally my card has a cool name, now it only needs votes.  :)

This is how it goes for every challenge.
- Submits card, thinks he's going to win
- Sees other cards, knows he's going to lose

 :-[
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 10, 2012, 09:57:10 am
In trying to adjust for one problem with my card, I created a huge other problem that I didn't realize. Yeah, my card is awful!

You mean, you broke its interaction with Scout? ;)

Thoughts on every other one, chosen to skip mine:

Hey, even though you only gave thoughts on every other card, did you look at all of them anyway?  Because in at least one of the two contests, you skipped mine and I hope it gets a fair shot. ;)

I will look at the rest later and withhold my commentary. :)

I'm limiting to cards that give me a favorable impression this week (obviously, one of the cards is mine).  Unlike others, I like the sifting dynamic.

I get the impression that people don't mind sifting, they just think it's massively undervalued.

I'm thinking of playing with some simulation to see what happens to average hand value when Mica is played by a BMU-Mica bot.

Quote
Topaz has an interesting dynamic. Could use to trash Coppers and Estates, but could also gain some power $2 cost cards (lighthouse, courtyard).

I do kinda like these cards that focus on interacting with $2 actions (or FG).

Quote
Garnet: A better Chancellor if you want to "activate" it.  Suppose that you've played all of your good cards.  Wouldn't it be great to put those good cards back on top of the deck without shuffling in the junk at the bottom?  Garnet does that.  One question / clarification I'd have is whether Garnet would trigger a Stash reshuffle.  That is, can I put the Stashes atop the deck too?  I think, maybe… so this should be better than Chancellor… not sure how much better.  I like trying to make Chancellor better.

I think it's the same as if you shuffled in Actions with Inn.

Quote
Dioptase: I like it.  It is a little strong at $5 with the VP option, but note that getting VP is going to cost in spending power.  I think Polk5440 sums up my sentiment w/ respect to the card.  I don't think it is right to think of the VP option as "free"... you don't always get 2VP with this card.  Conditions apply, which could lead to some interesting choices.

Again, I guess we could just simulate Smithy-BMU vs Mica-BMU and then vs Dioptase-BMU? :/ But then, maybe freaky stuff happens in engines. It seems intuitively unlikely to me, but you never know.

Quote
Looking back at these comments, I guess I don't like attacks.  Personal preference I guess, but what can I say?

I like strong attacks (though, cursing, not so much) and slow (in # of turns) games. I'm guessing I have much higher tolerance for AP in the card designs than most people here. I think it shows in my submissions this time around - arguably, both of them.

Finally my card has a cool name, now it only needs votes.  :)

This is how it goes for every challenge.
- Submits card, thinks he's going to win
- Sees other cards, knows he's going to lose

 :-[

Oh, definitely.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tables on August 10, 2012, 02:09:06 pm
With the Garnet thing, I'm not sure exactly what happened. I don't have the wording for my old card, which could have made a big difference, and I realised it was totally broken pretty soon after and fixed it to something different, but it could be a key thing about it which made it break which this doesn't do that's the problem. If I remember correctly, it was:
+$2
Set your deck aside. Shuffle your discard pile and place it face down, it is now your deck. The set aside cards are now your discard pile.

It was a little more elegantly worded than that, but mechanically, that was it. As you can see, very similar. And it had this serious issue that somehow cropped up. I can't explain it any more unfortunately.

I might try and give serious comments this time on the cards, but there's a few I really like.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: nopawnsintended on August 10, 2012, 05:49:30 pm
Quote
Garnet: A better Chancellor if you want to "activate" it.  Suppose that you've played all of your good cards.  Wouldn't it be great to put those good cards back on top of the deck without shuffling in the junk at the bottom?  Garnet does that.  One question / clarification I'd have is whether Garnet would trigger a Stash reshuffle.  That is, can I put the Stashes atop the deck too?  I think, maybe… so this should be better than Chancellor… not sure how much better.  I like trying to make Chancellor better.

I think it's the same as if you shuffled in Actions with Inn.

Not quite.  Garnet lets you retrieve your high-value money as well as your high-value actions.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 10, 2012, 06:28:58 pm
Quote
Garnet: A better Chancellor if you want to "activate" it.  Suppose that you've played all of your good cards.  Wouldn't it be great to put those good cards back on top of the deck without shuffling in the junk at the bottom?  Garnet does that.  One question / clarification I'd have is whether Garnet would trigger a Stash reshuffle.  That is, can I put the Stashes atop the deck too?  I think, maybe… so this should be better than Chancellor… not sure how much better.  I like trying to make Chancellor better.

I think it's the same as if you shuffled in Actions with Inn.

Not quite.  Garnet lets you retrieve your high-value money as well as your high-value actions.

What I meant was, the Stash ruling is (or should be) the same.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: ashersky on August 12, 2012, 07:25:12 am
In trying to adjust for one problem with my card, I created a huge other problem that I didn't realize. Yeah, my card is awful!

I second this emotion.  Although I'm really, really new to making up cards, it's fun to read just how far off my thinking was!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Adrienaline on August 12, 2012, 09:16:28 am
In trying to adjust for one problem with my card, I created a huge other problem that I didn't realize. Yeah, my card is awful!

I second this emotion.  Although I'm really, really new to making up cards, it's fun to read just how far off my thinking was!

Same, didn't realise how bad my card was.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 16, 2012, 11:32:59 am
The results for the Terminal Silver contest are in!

As a reminder, here are the criteria for this challenge:

Quote
Create a Terminal Silver card that conforms to the following constraints:

(1) The card type must be "Action" or "Action-Attack."  No other type or dual-type combinations are permitted.
(2) The card must provide exactly +$2 each time it is played; never any more or less.  Receipt of the +$2 cannot be conditional in any way.
(3) The card must be a terminal; that is, it must never provide +Actions.
(4) The player must have one fewer card in his hand after playing the card than he did beforehand.  Edge case exceptions to this rule are permitted.
(5) The card may not gain any Treasure cards to hand.  (Gaining them elsewhere is fine.)
(6) The card must not have a horizontal line in the card text.  To put it another way, it may only have "on play" effects; no "while in play," "on buy," or "on gain" effects are permitted.  Additionally, it may not have any special rules (Duchess, Embargo) or setup instructions (Black Market).

These criteria were very restrictive, but as I hoped, you all rose to the challenge and exhibited broad creativity in fulfilling the requirements of the challenge.  My own card might have been this twist on targeted discard:

Mercenary
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player chooses a card from his hand and reveals the rest.  You choose one revealed card for each player to discard.


It doesn't sting as much as Pillage, because you get to save your best card, but it still hurts worse than Militia most of the time, hence the higher cost.  Ok, with that out of the way, let's get to your cards:


#1 - Carpenter by Nicrosil with 17 points (Ruby)
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a card costing at most $4.


Lots of attacks in this batch, but the winner is friendlier.  At first blush, it looks like a Workshop variant, but I see it more as an early-game kickstarter.  With good 4's on the board, you can retroactively turn a 3/4 opening into a 4/4 opening.  I think popsofctown nailed an important use:  if you want to ramp up an engine that depends on $4 and $5 cards, use your $3 opening buy on this instead of Silver long enough to get a couple engine cards, then convert this into an engine piece.

Unlike the last pair of challenges, this pair were close races.  Hot on Carpenter's heels:


#2 - Town Fool by andwilk with 16 points (Tanzanite)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
All other players gain a Curse and choose to either trash a card from their hand or draw a card.

#3 - Street Performer by Tables with 14 points (Onyx)
$3 - Action
+$2
At the start of Clean-up this turn, choose up to two cards you have in play. For each you would discard from play this turn, shuffle it into your deck.

#4 (tie) - Tortoise by blueblimp with 13 points (Spinel)
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck and either trash it, discard it, or put it back.

#4 (tie) - Financier by Mecherath with 13 points (Hackmanite)
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Choose one of the following:
Gain a Copper, each other opponent gains a Curse;
Gain a Silver, each other opponent gains a Copper;
Gain a Gold, each other opponent gains a Silver.

#6 - Astronomer by Davio with 12 points (Sunstone)
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck.
Discard all revealed Victory and Curse cards.
Put all revealed Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order.
Put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.

#7 - Monolith by Tdog with 11 points (Rhodonite)
$5 - Action
+$2
+1 VP for every $4 you spend this turn, rounded down.

#8 (tie) - Presbytery by ChocophileBenj with 9 points (Zircon)
$3 - Action
+$2
Reveal two cards from your hand.  The player to your left chooses one of them for you to trash.

#8 (tie) - Trapper by Fragasnap with 9 points (Topaz)
$3 - Action
+$2
Name a card costing up to $2 and then reveal the top 3 cards of your deck.
If any copies of the named card are revealed, trash them and discard the rest.  Otherwise: Discard the revealed cards and gain a copy of the named card, putting it on top of your deck.

#8 (tie) - Recycler by zxcvbn2 with 9 points (Garnet)
$4 - Action
+$2
After playing this card, shuffle your discard pile and place it on top of your draw pile.

#8 (tie) - Auctioneer by Dsell with 9 points (Ammolite)
$4 - Action
+$2
You may reveal a Victory card from your hand. If you do, gain a card costing less than the revealed card.

#12 (tie) - Scaffold by Kirian with 8 points (Howlite)
$5 - Action
+$2
Choose one:  Gain a token, or gain a card costing up to 1 per token on your mat.  If you gained a Victory card, return two tokens to the supply.

#12 (tie) - Pillar by nopawnsintended with 8 points (Dioptase)
$5 - Action
+$2
+2 Cards, discard 2 cards.  For each Copper discarded, +1 VP.

#12 (tie) - Miscreant by eHalcyon with 8 points (Apatite)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards a card from his hand that is not a Victory card (or reveals a hand with only Victory cards) and gains a Copper, putting it in his hand.

#12 (tie) - Coffer by GeoLib with 8 points (Amazonite)
$5 - Action
+$2
Discard any number of cards.
Draw the same number of cards. You may set aside any Action cards drawn this way, as you draw them; discard the set aside cards after you finish drawing.

#16 (tie) - Ranger by jonts26 with 7 points (Serpentine)
$5 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.
If you discarded 1 or more cards, you may gain a Copper.
If you discarded 2 or more cards, you may gain a Silver.
If you discarded 3 or more cards, you may gain a Gold.
--
(Rule clarification: The Treasure-gaining clauses are independent. If you discard 3 cards you may gain any or all of Copper, Silver, and Gold.)

#16 (tie) - Cultist by Watno with 7 points (Jade)
$2 - Action
+$2
You may gain a Cultist in hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand.

#16 (tie) - Archer by RobertJ with 7 points (Ametrine)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least 4 cards in hand reveals a card from hand and either discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

#19 (tie) - Tinker by Guy Srinivasan with 6 points (Peridot)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
+1 Buy
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck and then puts it back. If the revealed card was not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

#19 (tie) - Magician by Saucery with 6 points (Melanite)
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top and bottom cards of your deck, then reveal a card from your hand. Place one of the revealed cards in your hand, one on top of your deck, and trash the remaining card.

#19 (tie) - Flood by heatthespurs with 6 points (Jasper)
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. He gains a number of Coppers equal to the number of Action cards revealed. Discard all revealed cards.

#19 (tie) - Marquee by Archetype with 6 points (Aventurine)
$4 - Action
+$2
You may trash this card. If you do, gain a Victory card costing 5 or less.

#19 (tie) - Overseer by shark bait with 6 points (Aquamarine)
$4 - Action Attack
+$2
Each player including yourself draws a card and reveals their hand.  For each hand revealed, choose one card and return it to the top of each player's deck.

#19 (tie) - Tax Collector by dnkywin with 6 points (Amethyst)
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may discard a Treasure or Victory card; if he doesn't, he gains a Curse.

#25 (tie) - Bat by Powerman with 4 points (Pearl)
$3 Action
+$2
You may choose to have each opponent draw a card.  If they do, +2VP.

#25 (tie) - Almost Strictly Better Than Fortune Teller by Grujah with 4 points (Moonstone)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Name a card.
Every other player reveals cards from their deck until they reveal the named card.
They discard it or put it on top of their deck, your choice.
They discard the other revealed cards.

#25 (tie) - Press Gang by hamcannon with 4 points (Labradorite)
$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top card of your deck. Gain a card costing exactly $1 less.

#25 (tie) - Kingdom Builder by WanderingWinder with 4 points (Kunzite)
$5 - Action
+$2
You may discard a Victory card costing up to $6. If you do, gain a Victory card costing up to $3 more than the discarded card, putting it into your hand.

#29 (tie) - Dealer by razorborne with 3 points (Sapphire)
$3 - Action
+$2
Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck. if yours has or is tied for the lowest cost in $, +2 Buys.

#29 (tie) - Purser by Qvist with 3 points (Obsidian)
$4 - Action
+$2
Gain a Silver.

#29 (tie) - Miner by Graystripe77 with 3 points (Citrine)
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Buy
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

#29 (tie) - Healer by Schneau with 3 points (Celestite)
$5 - Action
+$2
Look through your discard pile and trash up to 2 cards from it.

#29 (tie) - Scammer by PenPen with 3 points (Brandburg)
$6 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player trashes a Treasure card from his hand. He then gains a Treasure card costing at most $3 less than it (cost of gained card must be no lower than $0), and may choose to put it in his hand. Otherwise he reveals his hand with no Treasure cards.

#29 (tie) - Black Knight by Adrienaline with 3 points (Beryl)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Draw 2 cards.
Discard 2 cards.
Everyone else discards a card and gains a Copper to their hand.

#29 (tie) - Lemon by NoMoreFun with 3 points (Amber)
$1 - Action
+$2
Discard a Treasure from your hand (or reveal a hand with no Treasure).
If you discarded any cards this way, +1 Card.

#36 (tie) - Unions by Michaelf7777777 with 2 points (Turquoise)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with at least five cards discards a Treasure card (or reveals a hand with no Treasure).

#36 (tie) - Two Is Company by Titandrake with 2 points (Mica)
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$2
Discard 2 cards.

#36 (tie) - Tribe by One Armed Man with 2 points (Bloodstone)
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck. You choose 1 for them to place of the bottom of their deck and put the other back. If any non-Victory cards are revealed, gain a copy of one non-Victory card revealed this way.

#36 (tie) - Charlatan by zporiri with 2 points (Axinite)
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player gains two Estates or a Curse, his choice.

#36 (tie) - Ferryman by ashersky with 2 points (Alaxandrite)
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Trash a card from your hand, then draw a card.
Each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting one (their choice) in their hand.

#41 (tie) - Immigration Officer by Tejayes with 1 point (Opal)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may reveal a Victory or Curse card from his hand. If he doesn't, he may immediately buy a Victory or Curse card, putting it in his hand. If he doesn't, he discards his hand.
--
(Rules clarification: When this is played, each other player may play any number of Treasure cards from his hand, then buy a Victory or Curse card costing up to the total number of $ played. All Treasure cards played this way stay in play until that player's next Cleanup phase.)

#41 (tie) - Storyteller by popsofctown with 1 point (Larimar)
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Gain a card costing up to $4, put it on top of your discard pile.
Reveal a card from your hand or the top of your discard pile.  Each opponent chooses one: he gains a copy of that card, or you do, his choice.

#41 (tie) - Chamberlain by Dubdubdubdub with 1 point (Kyanite)
$3 - Action
+$2
You may draw 3 cards. If you do, reveal 3 cards from your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you to discard. Trash the other two.

#41 (tie) - Strictly Better Than Strictly Worse Than Silver by Polk5440 with 1 point (Emerald)
$2 - Action
+$2

#41 (tie) - Gypsy by Robz888 with 1 point (Agate)
$2 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player with fewer than 6 cards in hand gains a Copper in hand. If no player gains a Copper this way, discard this from play. Otherwise, play this again.

#46 (tie) - Money Faker by Hks with 0 points (Tourmaline)
$5 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player may trash a Copper.
Each other player may discard a Copper. If he does, he gains a Copper. Otherwise, he gains three Coppers.

#46 (tie) - Highwayman by zahlman with 0 points (Malachite)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
When you play this card, you may trash it. If you do, +1 VP.
Each other player draws 2 cards, then shows you his hand. You may choose a card from each revealed hand costing up to $3 and trash it. Each other player then discards down to 4 cards in hand.
--
(Rules clarification: Attacked opponents do not see each others' hands.)

#46 (tie) - Piper/Town Watch by Garth One-eye/DWetzel with 0 points (Iolite)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards an Action card (or reveals a hand with no Actions).

#46 (tie) - Inquisitor by yuma with 0 points (Chalcedony)
$4 - Action-Attack
+$2
Each other player discards 2 different named cards and gains a Copper.
(If the player reveals a hand of all the same cards, they discard only 1 card.)

#46 (tie) - Laborer by Drab Emordnilap with 0 points (Carnelian)
$1 - Action
+$2
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Tdog on August 16, 2012, 11:51:55 am
Woo-hoo 7th place! I was expecting the worst after reading the comments on it.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: PenPen on August 16, 2012, 12:00:17 pm
I'm thankful that I didn't get last place here! I dunno about the other one though...

Anyway congrats to Nicrosil!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Archetype on August 16, 2012, 12:03:40 pm
Congrats Nicrosil! I was going to vote for you but I forgot to message rinkworks my votes :P
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Mecherath on August 16, 2012, 12:33:19 pm
Glad to not have to scroll too far down for mine.  Not sure if I'll win one, but it's an honor to be near the top in a close race.  Great job Nicrosil!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Davio on August 16, 2012, 12:50:46 pm
GG to the winner.

6th place, wow, I might even win one someday.  ;D
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Dsell on August 16, 2012, 12:53:22 pm
GG to the winner.

6th place, wow, I might even win one someday.  ;D

I gave yours 2 points! I'm feeling pretty good about my 8th place finish too! Although all of my ideas so far have either gotten between 7-10 points or 0-1 points. Consistently inconsistent?
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 16, 2012, 12:56:51 pm
My name is misspelled!

So I tried to follow blueblimp's lead from an earlier pair of contests (the pair with TfB) and submitted cards to #9 and #10 that worked with the "Copper" theme.  I'm glad one of them made it. ;D

I will probably drop that theme in future submissions now.  In my submission to rinkworks, I mused if people were starting to get sick of all the Copper.  But I think there are some other mini-themes that can be pushed...
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: ChocophileBenj on August 16, 2012, 01:00:59 pm
Congrats to Nicrosil, but also to the followings because it is much more tied than the two previous one (maybe because it is more generalistic ?) And WanderingWinder, what is the fake ? :)

Archer (Ametrine) was really close to my vandal http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2553.0 . So I gave 3 points ^^
I didn't want to submit it because I don't like to take back ideas, I want to create more stuff !
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: rinkworks on August 16, 2012, 01:07:26 pm
My name is misspelled!

Aack!  Fixed now.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Adrienaline on August 16, 2012, 01:23:51 pm
Now I'm confused, negative comments about black knight on this one, positive comments about my card on the potion cost challenge, but this one scored more points... odd.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: zahlman on August 16, 2012, 01:26:01 pm
Wait, I got points for the other one but not this? WTF? (I think this one probably needs to cost 5, on reflection...)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Titandrake on August 16, 2012, 01:51:44 pm
So the lesson here is, don't design cards at 2 AM because you make silly cards. At the time, Mica seemed really funny. Now, not so much. At least it got 2 points.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: DWetzel on August 16, 2012, 02:08:56 pm
Wow, zero?  Really?  That seems.. harsh.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: ashersky on August 16, 2012, 02:41:10 pm
So the lesson here is, don't design cards at 2 AM because you make silly cards. At the time, Mica seemed really funny. Now, not so much. At least it got 2 points.

I'm there in the 2 point range with you with my Ferryman/Alaxandrite.  You know, at the time I thought, ok, so it's a strong attack, but has so many chances to backfire (take the curse in hand, pass it right back or just TFB it to something else...take the copper in hand and buy your 5 action, gold, province...) that it wouldn't be overpowered...I saw it as an attack that competed with Swindler at the 3 price point, turned out to be an OP Mountebank clone...

What can I say?  It was my first card, and I clearly don't have a grasp on this.  Maybe better at $5?  $6?  Thanks to the two who gave me votes!

#36 (tie) - Ferryman by ashersky with 2 points (Alaxandrite)
$3 - Action-Attack
+$2
Trash a card from your hand, then draw a card.
Each other player gains a Curse and a Copper, putting one (their choice) in their hand.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Archetype on August 16, 2012, 02:47:21 pm
Wow, zero?  Really?  That seems.. harsh.
If you wanted a point you could have *gasp* voted!
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: DWetzel on August 16, 2012, 03:02:25 pm
There is that.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Mecherath on August 16, 2012, 03:35:47 pm
Wow, zero?  Really?  That seems.. harsh.
If you wanted a point you could have *gasp* voted!

Does the act of voting give you a point?  Because you can't vote for yourself.  Rinkworks' scripts automatically dis-count self votes.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 16, 2012, 03:36:57 pm
Wow, zero?  Really?  That seems.. harsh.
If you wanted a point you could have *gasp* voted!

Does the act of voting give you a point?  Because you can't vote for yourself.  Rinkworks' scripts automatically dis-count self votes.

If you participate in voting for others, you get a bonus point!  Read the OP... :P

Edit: Sorry, not the OP, the ballot.  I'll quote it, to make up for my error!

By submitting vote(s) for a challenge, you will automatically earn 1 point for your entry in that challenge.  This is to incentivize contestants to submit votes.  (My script does this automatically, so don't worry that I'll forget to do this.)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 16, 2012, 03:41:07 pm
This is the best challenge so far, for me, because my first and second favorites made first and second respectively :)
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Davio on August 16, 2012, 04:58:10 pm
GG to the winner.

6th place, wow, I might even win one someday.  ;D

I gave yours 2 points! I'm feeling pretty good about my 8th place finish too! Although all of my ideas so far have either gotten between 7-10 points or 0-1 points. Consistently inconsistent?
Thanks!

That really skyrockets my effort vs reward ratio!  ;D
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: One Armed Man on August 16, 2012, 05:11:30 pm
GG to the winner.

6th place, wow, I might even win one someday.  ;D

I think that your Astronomer is almost identical to my Scribe from the deck improver contest, which also got 6th.
I have decided that if I make a fanset, it would include the following version.

$4 - Action
+$2
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the Curses in your hand, put the Treasure cards on the bottom of your deck in any order, discard the Victory cards, and put all revealed Action cards on the top of your deck in any order.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: Watno on August 16, 2012, 06:17:06 pm
I like how a card with the same name as mine (Cultist) and one with a similar mechanic (Rats) got revealed the week after i made it.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: andwilk on August 16, 2012, 09:58:02 pm
Congrats to the winner!

I don't know whether to be happy or disappointed that I've came in 2nd place in 2 contests now by 1 point.  *first world problems*
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: GeoLib on August 16, 2012, 10:07:30 pm
Well I'm just glad that mine didn't get panned. Pleased with this result for my first try.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: eHalcyon on August 16, 2012, 10:11:40 pm
Looking over the list, I'm surprised that Grujah's entry scored so low.  Didn't it get favourable comments?  I think the targeted Fortun Teller effect might be enough to have it cost $5, but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: RobertJ on August 17, 2012, 04:18:18 am
Archer (Ametrine) was really close to my vandal http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=2553.0 . So I gave 3 points ^^
I didn't want to submit it because I don't like to take back ideas, I want to create more stuff !

Thanks for voting for my card. You're right it does look like your Vandal. However this was definitely a case of us both having the same idea independently rather than plagiarism. Best of luck with the remaining contests.
Title: Re: Mini-Set Design Contest, Challenge #9: Terminal Silver!
Post by: popsofctown on August 17, 2012, 10:31:53 am
Looking over the list, I'm surprised that Grujah's entry scored so low.  Didn't it get favourable comments?  I think the targeted Fortun Teller effect might be enough to have it cost $5, but I'm not sure.
I gave it one point.