Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - dz

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 13, 2020, 11:37:19 pm »
I was just reading through the secret histories, for Conspirator you say that it replaced a really crazy card late into set development that was to be fixed up for a later expansion. Has a fixed version of that card been released and if so what is it?

It's Horn of Plenty.

Quote from: Cornucopia's secret history
Long ago, Intrigue had a card that read, "+$1 per Action card you've played this turn." It cost $4. This was popular with a certain kind of player. But many games it was useless - you needed a bunch of pieces to put together this puzzle - and then some games it was unbeatable. You would get staggering amounts of $ out of it, with +buys from something to make them count. Some people defended it, but I killed it. I could always try to fix it up later; there was no reason to give Intrigue a broken/useless card. Intrigue got Conspirator instead, which has a hint of the original premise.

I tried a new version in a later set: "+2 Actions +1 Buy. While this is in play, when you play another Action card, +$1." For $5. The idea was to provide some of what you needed with the original card, so that it was playable in more games, while weakening it in the games where it was good. You've got extra actions and a +buy up front... but it doesn't count Actions already played, only ones played after it. You can't draw your whole deck and finally draw it and play it and yeeha. Anyway this too was broken. I tried several things, including a version that only counted differently named cards. Eventually I gave up on it.

The solution in the end was to make it a Workshop variant. You don't get to combine the money with your other money. It doesn't use up your buy though. To be good enough and not fluctuate too much, it had to count your treasures too. At first it was an action with an effect delayed until the end of your buy phase, but I turned it into a treasure worth $0. Some people just liked that there was a treasure worth $0, I don't know what to tell you. So it doesn't use an action, and works with treasures naturally. This version was still sometimes too strong, so it got the "trash it if gained VP" clause.

Rules Questions / Re: Simple Rules Questions
« on: July 12, 2020, 05:24:06 am »
Quick question:
Can you remodel a P x$ cost to a P (x+2)$ cost?


Quote from: Alchemy Rulebook
If you use Remodel to trash a card costing , you gain a card costing up to , which could be a card costing , , , , and on down to .

Rules Questions / Re: Considering Trader errata
« on: May 11, 2020, 08:13:18 am »

What is the game design reason reason why "Exchange" couldn't be defined as returning a card to its pile and gaining the new one? (Similar to how buying a card implies gaining it , unless prevented by a specific card interaction.)* Before Adventures, every card entering your deck was gained (with  Masquerade being the only exception back then). This would be much more intuitive IMO (e.g. fixing your Guildhall example for the new Trader). And I don't see an immediate reason how this would break anything:

Exchanging would then work with on-gain topdecking like Seal, but there's not that many topdeckers as to significantly change the power level of the cards using the Exchange mechanic.
It would also allow Trader (old or new), Changeling and Watchtower to replace the exchanged card by a Silver or Changeling resp. trash it, but the upgraded Travellers and Vampire/Bat are strong enough that you would very rarely want to do this.

*Specifically, I would define "You may Exchange card A for card B" as just a formal shortcut for "If there is a pile for both A and B and the B pile isn't empty, return card A to its pile and gain card B."

Generally, DXV wanted to avoid "this keyword is also this other keyword."

What was the reason for making it so that cards Exiled from the Supply aren't considered "gained"?  While you were developing Menagerie, was there a point where they were treated as gained?
They were never gained (in Menagerie or Renaissance). It's not gaining so I didn't make it gaining. I don't want something to "count as" something else if I can avoid it. The cards could have said "gain it and exile it" but then a lot of effects can squeeze in there and make off with the card. So they don't.

Here's about why exchanging isn't gaining/trashing for Travellers/exchanging:

Why doesn't exchanging cause you to gain the new cards? Is it to lower their power level by removing Royal Seal, Traveling Fair, or Watchtower combos? Or did you feel like it would be simpler to just not have it gaining?
I obv. didn't want to trash the Travellers because it would reduce your ability to go up the path, or require 40 more cards. It made no sense to both trash and return them, it's just extra words to confuse people. Since you weren't trashing them, I automatically preferred not gaining them, it seems simpler. Gaining them but not trashing them just seems weird to me.

This "not trashing, so not gaining" also applies to Masquerade.

Originally Masquerade counted as both gaining and trashing. Valerie didn't like how it was gaining without gaining and trashing without trashing. To me gaining meant "now it's yours" and trashing meant "now it isn't," but to Valerie gaining meant "take it and put it into your discard pile" and trashing meant "move it to the trash." She could see it being that you gained the card but didn't trash it, but I felt it should be both or neither. So it's neither.

Rules Questions / Re: Clarifying playing the action with Toil
« on: May 08, 2020, 11:44:02 pm »
If I buy Toil and play an Action card that gives me an action, can I continue to play more Actions from my hand? It doesnít say you are back in your Action phase. So I am guessing that I cannot.

Correct, you're not in your Action phase, so you can't play more Actions.

However, am I correct in thinking that if I play an Action card with Toil that gives me virtual coin, though I canít play more Treasures after buying an Event, I can use the money from the virtual coin in my next buy?

You can only use your $ this turn. So if you Toil a Festival, you only get to use the +Buy and +$2 this turn.

Finally, is it true that if the Action card that I play with Toil allows me to trash or exile a card from my hand, or is an Attack card, I could trash or attack because it it part of resolving that one action I have been allowed to play? But if it lets me draw cards, I basically cannot use the cards I have drawn since they would just be discarded at the end of my turn, right?

Yes you can still exile/trash/attack. If you draw Actions with Smithies, you can't play them (unless you do more Toiling).

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: May 05, 2020, 11:00:58 am »
is there a "standard type order" for cards? or is it kinda whichever parts are more important are listed first?
I'm just thinking specifically Enchantress and Gatekeeper have the same set of types but are in different order.

Is there a specific reason or formula for the order types are written on cards?
The vague idea is to put the ones that determine when you can play the card first, and after that have the ones that don't mean as much. I may have been inconsistent somewhere.

I noticed that Gatekeeper has its types listed as Action - Duration - Attack, even though all the other Duration Attacks have Attack come first. Was this a mistake?
I think you mean Raider; Raider has Duration in front of Attacks, all other Duration Attacks have Attack first. Well I have news for you. There's a new set, and a card in it called Gatekeeper also does that.

It's just me thinking, what order should these be in, oh Duration should be ahead of Attack, and doing that. If I remember I'll change it in Adventures when the time comes.

Rules Questions / Re: Playing Durations with Emulators
« on: April 25, 2020, 10:10:36 pm »

But after looking back we realized, wait, there is something different. Overlord plays a card and leaves it in the Supply. What we had been doing was obeying the rules as if Overlord was the card. For instance, if I play Overlord as Archive, Overlord would stay out in play with the set aside cards; it was an Archive. What would I do with the new errata'd Overlord? If I play Overlord on an Archive in the Supply, do the set-aside cards go on the Archive in the Supply? Do I set them aside elsewhere?

Cards you set aside with Archive and Cargo Ship aren't actually set aside on anywhere specific. You just set them aside. Those cards say "set aside on this" to be helpful for the common case. Anyways, Overlord playing Archive works as normal. IRL, I would recommend putting the set aside cards where you can remember them.

Cargo Ship is just being helpful; you set aside a card, and if you have that Cargo ship in play as you usually do, that's a good place to put the set-aside card.

And in general, when an emulated card refers to itself, what happens? I play Overlord+Mining Village, I choose to trash "it"; do I trash a Mining Village from the Supply, trash the Overlord, or trash nothing at all and get no +$2? The wiki pages are doing no good for me.

When you play Mining Village (or other one-shots), they expect themselves to be in play. If it's not in play, they can't move themselves. So with Mining Village, you can't trash it for +$2, since MV isn't in play. But with Encampment, you get +2 Cards +2 Actions, and you don't set it aside, because Encampment isn't in play.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: April 14, 2020, 10:24:20 pm »
Why did you change Raider from a cost of $5 to $6, and also change "4 or more cards" to "5 or more cards?" (From Nocturne's secret history) Was it just too good?
Letting it work twice is just too oppressive. It couldn't have been "4 or more" for more than one evening.

It was $5 until late in the going. We had some bad recommended set games where someone got it on a 5/2, and then we played some more games that intentionally had a 5/2 Raider, and then I upped it to $6. When you get it turn one, the Cutpurse effect - all it does for you then - keeps other players from $5. And they can't buy the Cutpurse to do that right back to you - the Cutpurse costs $5. It stood out as a thing that made players have no fun. I could have tried to make a weaker cheaper version, so we could all buy it, or just up it to $6, and well time was short and $6 seemed fine.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: March 23, 2020, 03:01:32 am »
Why did you decide to make Horses cost instead of costing like most non-supply cards?

My philosophy changed there, originally I thought "make them $0 so it's clear you must not be able to buy them," now I think "make them a cost that makes sense, so that they interact better with cards that care about costs." Except sometimes there might still be a reason for an exception, e.g. the Spirit Costs are all based on what Exorcist wants.

And then Experiment (which plays a lot like Horse) costs $3, so that's the cost that makes the most sense.

Rules Questions / Re: Way of the Mouse and Setup Rules
« on: March 20, 2020, 08:04:23 am »
Way of the Mouse. Wacky card. Do I perform Setup instructions for the card set aside for this? Like, if I set aside Trade Route, for example, do I get out the mat and put coin tokens on the victory piles?

Edit: Damn, cardImage tags from the extension didn't work on Way of the Mouse.

This was answered in the rulebook, and the answer is yes. So if you set aside e.g. Pixie, you start with Goat.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: March wording with new errata
« on: March 17, 2020, 11:30:45 am »
The new errata says:

when you are told to get a card from your discard pile, if it's not on top, or the card is chosen, you can look through your discard pile to get the card. You don't get to look through your discard pile to take the top card (again unless you're choosing a card from your discard pile).

I figured this meant that one of the new cards in Menagerie would have some sort of "trash a card from your discard pile" effect or something, and the errata was so that it didn't need to have "you may look through your discard pile".

Now there's March:

Look through your discard pile.
You may play an Action card from it.

With the errata, why not just "you may play an action card from your discard pile"? Or alternatively, why have the errata talk about choosing a card from your discard pile implicitly allowing you to look through it if the new card that has you choose a card from your discard pile has that wording anyway?

Will cards that involve the discard pile and cost reduction be changed to  remove extraneous words?
Where possible. Getting a card from the discard pile can't always save words; e.g. Harbinger is optional, you get to look before deciding to do it, so we have to say, look.

Also if you look at the online cards, Scavenger and Mountain Village no longer say "look," since they're mandatory. Meanwhile Hermit/Harbinger/Settlers/Bustling Village still say "look," since they're optional.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Menagerie Bonus Previews
« on: March 17, 2020, 10:59:37 am »
Hmm. Way of the Rat says "You may discard a Treasure to gain a copy of this." But Desperation says "You may gain a Curse. If you do, +1 Buy and +$2."

Now, I happen to prefer the old "if you do" wording over the modern "to", so I'm hardly complaining, but I am left wondering why Menagerie isn't consistent, here.

The answer to any inconsistency in wording:

We may have talked about it but there's no real reason there. The cards try to be phrased well and are not all phrased at once.

I don't know if there was a reason. It got this wording and this wording seemed fine; the usual story when people want the story of the wording.

Rules Questions / Re: Ferry/Wayfarer
« on: March 15, 2020, 10:30:26 pm »
Okay does Ferry on Wayfarer do anything (after a card has been gained)?

Ferry (and all cost-reductions) have no effect once Wayfarer changes costs.

If you haven't gained anything, Ferry on Wayfarer costs $4.

But if you gained Village, Wayfarer's cost becomes $3, and Ferry doesn't change anything.

In contrast, if you gain Village, then put Ferry on Village, Wayfarer now costs $1.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Menagerie Bonus Previews
« on: March 13, 2020, 06:08:00 am »
can necromancer play cards from trash as Horses?

Iím not DXV, but why couldnít you?

Yes you can do that. They don't return to their piles (stop moving rule), but they're still Labs for Necromancer.

Rules Questions / Re: Post errata Band of Misfits + Cargo Ship
« on: February 18, 2020, 07:49:37 am »
If Cargo Ship was put in play, the card you set aside still isn't in play - it's in set-aside land. So if Cargo Ship is played from the pile, the set aside card won't be on the pile - it's still in set-aside land.

The card is still put in your hand next turn, even if Cargo Ship goes somewhere else (e.g. trashed with Bonfire).

Rules Questions / Re: New lose-track rule: The Sun's Gift
« on: January 13, 2020, 09:47:27 pm »
The "cards on top of deck getting covered up" part is still the same. So sure, Artificer loses track. Not that it matters though, since Artificer isn't moving Blessed Village afterwards.

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion: Menagerie
« on: January 10, 2020, 10:05:22 pm »
The interesting thing is that with coffers, you have vanilla cards.  You have baker, candlestick maker, and to a lesser extent plaza and villain.  But there arenít really vanilla villager cards.  No cantrip that gives you villagers, just patron and maybe acting troupe.  I think vanilla villager cards just donít work as well as cards like lackeys that put a limit on how many you can gain. 

The question is if horses are more like coffers or more like villagers.  I suspect theyíre more like coffers, and vanilla horse cards would work just fine.  Consider an action that just says +1 action, +1 Horse.  Seems like a solid card idea to me.

It's more of a battle between simple things, and exciting things. The lack of vanilla villagers is mostly because of how unexciting and low-hanging fruit they are compared to e.g. Recruiter.

Quote from: Renaissance outtakes
There was a village that was, cantrip, +1 Villager; man it's fine, you can argue about, does it need to cost $5, but it's nice. The village that's always there when you need it. But really, the experience it gives is the villager experience, and other cards are giving us that experience. Another village just came with +2 Villagers; we already have that experience too.

Rules Questions / Re: Simple Rules Questions
« on: November 30, 2019, 09:52:41 am »
Is the following argument true?

Assume I already bought the project Sewers. I play Band of Misfits to play Treasure Map. I trash a Treasure Map from my hand, and trash another Treasure Map from my hand by effect of Sewers. I trashed two Treasure Maps before evaluating the "if" clause, thus I can gain four Golds.

I tried it on Dominion Online but didn't gain Golds.

Although this question is so particular in real-play, I am just curious about it.

Online is correct, that doesn't work. Treasure Map only checks what you trashed while resolving it, and ignores e.g. Sewers. Also Band doesn't work with Map, as you can't trash the original Map from the supply.

Rules Questions / Re: may look
« on: November 04, 2019, 10:38:55 pm »
Native Village doesn't let you look at your top card before you choose to put it on your mat. You can only look at it once it's on your mat; so that text is there to clarify the fact that you can now look at it.

Haven doesn't need that clarification though, because you can always look at your hand.

Other Games / Re: Temporum rules
« on: October 03, 2019, 08:42:02 pm »
If you have Detective in play, and no cards in hand when Neolithic Renaissance triggers; do you draw 3 or 4 cards?

Detective says when you have no cards in hand and draw, draw and extra card.

Neolithic Renaissance says each player draws until they have 3 cards in hand.

Depends on if the draw from Neolithic is one at a time or not it seems.

This is answered in the rulebook: "Detective: This doesn't help when you draw up to 3 cards via Neolithic Renaissance; you draw one card, draw an extra card due to Detective, draw another card and now you are at 3 cards and stop."

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« on: September 27, 2019, 07:18:30 am »
Question: Does Inheriting something change the type of the Estate pile to Action - Victory during your turns as well (which has implications for other events and Teacher, etc.)? I don't think so, but just wanted to verify.
No. Normally you go by the randomizer card. Estate once had one for some reason and now does not. But, the "pile" is still always the printed Estate.

I believe dbclick stumbled over the omitted "your" as i did:  What about other players Estates? Does Rabble discard them, if i inherited something?


Dominion General Discussion / Re: Dominion 2019 Errata and Rules Tweaks
« on: September 24, 2019, 09:31:58 pm »
Can you explain how Tunnel works with the new rules? I remember someone saying that you can't use Tunnel's Reaction over and over because it gets covered up by the first Gold gained.

To reveal Tunnel for Gold, you have to discard it. If you can only discard it once, you can only reveal it once.

Does this mean the interaction becomes a ridiculously abusive Grand Market Village? Does the same abusiveness apply to Death Cart?

To get $2 from Mining Village, you have to move it from play to trash. Band of Misfits doesn't move it to play, so that doesn't work. Same scenario with Death Cart.

This seems horrible to track. It also seems counterintuitive to the point of doing something that clearly isn't written or implied on the card. The new text just says play the (Duration) card but leave it in the supply. To me this implies that you simply don't get the benefit at the start of your next turn(s) that you normally would. I see nothing in the text that would make me think I have to leave BoM in play instead of discarding it as usual.

There's also nothing in the text for any Throne Room that implies that you keep Throne in play with a Duration it replayed. It's only in the rulebook. How has no one complained about this?

Other Games / Re: Celeste
« on: September 24, 2019, 10:37:41 am »
I stopped quite a few screens before the door. I was in one of the first screens with the blowfish, I was supposed to dash into it, boost myself across some spikes, then dash back to that fish so it would blow me into another and so on. I kept not being able to bounce hard enough from dashing into the fish to clear the spikes without using the dash I needed to go back to the fish afterwards. After feeling rather frustrated with some of the screens in Core (and beating them through sheer persistence rather than skill), I thought it was a good spot to end.

This is the exact one Iím stuck on as well. The great thing about this game is that each screen is two challenges: the puzzle of figuring out what to do to beat it, and then executing the platforming moves. In this one though it seems pretty obvious what to do, but very hard to pull off.

Are you holding jump after bouncing on the pufferfish? I dash into it, and the momentum from the dash, plus holding jump allows me to get over the spikes.

Other Games / Re: Celeste
« on: September 23, 2019, 06:39:01 pm »
So I got Celeste for free through the Epic Store some time ago, and finally decided to play it this week. Beat chapters 1-8 (~130 strawberries, ~1800 deaths), tried chapter 9 but it quickly looked like it would require more skill than I have (then I checked the whole thing on youtube, and there's zero chance I beat that).

You are required to beat several (or maybe all?) of the B and C sides before you can beat chapter 9.

Except if you watch some speedruns, you will realize you can just dash through the heart door (and it's not even that hard to do).

Other Games / Re: Celeste
« on: September 10, 2019, 06:40:42 pm »
I'm guessing that's a thing I can't access since I couldn't find all the berries.
Chapter 9 is a free DLC that just came out. At least for the parts I've played through so far, it doesn't require berries. (Maybe you need to finish Chapter 8 to see it?)

I haven't played through all of it yet (because I'm really bad at advanced techniques) but it's pretty good. It's essentially a B-side. I enjoyed the B-sides, although I prefer A-sides. (I like having a relatively easy main path with optional berry challenges.)

To unlock it you just need to finish Core (which requires 4 hearts). About midway through it'll require more hearts to continue. Also you should be able to get to that point without any advanced movement.

Other Games / Re: Celeste
« on: September 10, 2019, 09:51:33 am »
is celeste still relevant?

Anyway there's now a Chapter 9. It took hours for me to finish it, but I loved it. Of course, the music is awesome. (Also if you though 7C was crazy long and difficult, wait until you reach the final screen.)

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5

Page created in 0.247 seconds with 18 queries.