1
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Storyteller
« on: March 30, 2015, 03:27:55 pm »
Thanks guys, that makes sense!
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.
2
Dominion: Adventures Previews / Re: Preview: Storyteller
« on: March 30, 2015, 03:13:22 pm »
I'm curious why it gives +1 action and +$1 instead of just saying +1 action +1 card, as these will amount to the same thing. Is there some interaction here that I'm missing? Overall a really cool card though!
3
Dominion Articles / Re: The 10 words card summary challenge
« on: March 29, 2015, 05:06:19 pm »
Menagerie: Works with discard for benefit and virtual money. Seldom ignorable.
4
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Diplomat - $5 duration card
« on: March 18, 2015, 08:54:55 am »
The way I understand it as working is that you play it for its extremely powerful ability, then instead of discarding you pass it to the player to your left and leave it on the table so that the duration ability will activate at the start of their next turn. Then they'll discard it normally at the end of their turn and have an opportunity to play it themselves for the super powered top portion, etc. Obviously the wording will need some cleaning up to more accurately reflect this, but I think it makes sense.
I could be completely wrong of course; that's just how I interpreted it as working.
I can't comment much on the card itself right now, although my gut instinct would be to say its too weak, and by that I mean the bonus for the other player is too strong to make me want to buy it. But I'll need to think about it more.
I could be completely wrong of course; that's just how I interpreted it as working.
I can't comment much on the card itself right now, although my gut instinct would be to say its too weak, and by that I mean the bonus for the other player is too strong to make me want to buy it. But I'll need to think about it more.
5
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: March 08, 2015, 01:32:19 pm »
I was wondering why Rats is your favorite card. It's one of my favorites to play with, but I guess I was wondering if there's any reason in particular that Rats stands out to you.
I also find it interesting that of all the published cards, Rats seems to rely the most heavily on needing another specific card type (a trasher) to be in the kingdom in order for it to be worth buying. (although, this being the dominion strategy forum, I'm sure you guys will find some edge cases!) Sure, without a source of +buy Highway is basically an overpriced Peddler, but theres still some situations where one would help you, whereas without a way to trash your Rats, buying them will usually hurt your deck.
That being said, what is your favorite Rats "enabler?" Are there any trashers that you especially like to combo with Rats?
I also find it interesting that of all the published cards, Rats seems to rely the most heavily on needing another specific card type (a trasher) to be in the kingdom in order for it to be worth buying. (although, this being the dominion strategy forum, I'm sure you guys will find some edge cases!) Sure, without a source of +buy Highway is basically an overpriced Peddler, but theres still some situations where one would help you, whereas without a way to trash your Rats, buying them will usually hurt your deck.
That being said, what is your favorite Rats "enabler?" Are there any trashers that you especially like to combo with Rats?
6
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Funky card idea
« on: June 18, 2014, 05:37:51 pm »
I like it. It seems somewhat like a much more balanced version of the card Palace I proposed in this thread http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=10524.msg350669#msg350669. I do agree however that it might be more interesting to see a different on play effect, as right now it's quite similar to Bishop. It probably needs to be able to trash to ensure a way of getting rid of your starting estates, but I'm not exactly sure what benefit it should provide. I'm assuming that this card would be primarily used in a three pile rush strategy. Maybe such a strategy doesn't need any help, but you could consider the following:
+1 Action. You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, you may trash up to two copies of the same card from the supply.
+1 Action. You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, you may trash up to two copies of the same card from the supply.
7
Dominion General Discussion / Re: New Promo at Origins...
« on: June 13, 2014, 01:46:09 pm »I'm trying to decide what the funniest "Prince of X" is. Too bad you can't have a Prince of Harems...
Prince of Princesses
8
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cathedral: mashup of Embassy and Lookout
« on: May 22, 2014, 03:10:13 pm »Trashers are usually the most important thing in the game. Reducing end-game usage to improve trashing almost certainly strengthens the card, while the reverse of course weakens it. Also, a card that trashes worse but is still safe enough to use later is more interesting.
I think I agree with everything you're saying here. I worry that reducing the reveal to 5 cards doesn't significantly weaken its trashing, and makes it much less viable as an end game searcher, almost strictly worse than Embassy. At six cards I hoped that late in the game it would be able to easily set up strong turns on the turn you play it even with heavy greening, at the cost of severely damaging your long-term economy.
I also think that limiting its ability to trash estates is a pretty significant nerf; isn't that the only thing keeping Spice Merchant from being completely OP?
9
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cathedral: mashup of Embassy and Lookout
« on: May 22, 2014, 02:57:15 pm »
Thanks for the suggestions!
As I said in my original post, I was already considering making the victory point discard mandatory and your comments have helped convince me that that is almost certainly a good idea.
With the mandatory vp discard, I'm not so sure that its overpowered as an opener. I think we all agree that chapel would probably be worth buying most of the time if it cost $5; but I really don't think it would be nearly so useful if it couldn't trash estates. I do think the comparison to chapel is legitimate, the name of the card itself is a reference to chapel.
Also, in response to LastFootNote, I'm not entirely convinced that reducing the number of revealed cards is the thing to do here. At some point, the card actually becomes weaker the more cards it reveals as you can still only keep two and are forced to trash the rest, so the more cards you reveal the more good cards you'll be potentially forced to trash. Also, since its terminal, unless you play a village before it you're unable to play any nice action cards you decide to keep. In this way it's very different from Embassy; I find Embassy to work well partially because if I play it as my last action I can just discard my extra action cards and keep whatever treasure cards I draw. You're unable to do this with Cathedral, because if you choose not to draw any revealed action cards they will be trashed.
Do you think it would still be worth picking up at $6, primarily for its endgame sifting/searching function?
As I said in my original post, I was already considering making the victory point discard mandatory and your comments have helped convince me that that is almost certainly a good idea.
With the mandatory vp discard, I'm not so sure that its overpowered as an opener. I think we all agree that chapel would probably be worth buying most of the time if it cost $5; but I really don't think it would be nearly so useful if it couldn't trash estates. I do think the comparison to chapel is legitimate, the name of the card itself is a reference to chapel.
Also, in response to LastFootNote, I'm not entirely convinced that reducing the number of revealed cards is the thing to do here. At some point, the card actually becomes weaker the more cards it reveals as you can still only keep two and are forced to trash the rest, so the more cards you reveal the more good cards you'll be potentially forced to trash. Also, since its terminal, unless you play a village before it you're unable to play any nice action cards you decide to keep. In this way it's very different from Embassy; I find Embassy to work well partially because if I play it as my last action I can just discard my extra action cards and keep whatever treasure cards I draw. You're unable to do this with Cathedral, because if you choose not to draw any revealed action cards they will be trashed.
Do you think it would still be worth picking up at $6, primarily for its endgame sifting/searching function?
10
Variants and Fan Cards / Cathedral: mashup of Embassy and Lookout
« on: May 22, 2014, 11:45:47 am »
Hey everyone, here's another custom I designed a while back; I'd love to hear your thoughts on it.
It's a relatively simple card that has an interesting change in usefulness throughout the game. I think it would be a fantastic card to open with, possible strictly better than Embassy as it doesn't give your opponent a silver and cycles your deck faster while trashing coppers and estates like nobody's business. However, it becomes MUCH less useful in the mid game as you'll probably have three cards out of the six revealed that you'd like to keep, potentially forcing you to trash valuable action cards. This is especially likely if you've been using it religiously (no pun intended
) early on in the game to make a slim deck. However, I think it's most interesting use comes in the late game when you can use it as a super-sifter, searching through the top six cards of your deck for the ones you really need, discarding upcoming green, and not really worrying too much about the possibility of having to trash action cards because at that point in the game you might not see them in the next reshuffle anyway. It basically gives you the ability to gamble crippling your long-term economy so that you can search for the cards you really need this turn.
One change I've considered is making it force the player to discard all revealed victory cards, so that it couldn't be used to trash estates in the early game.
Anyway, any and all feedback would be appreciated, thanks in advance!
Quote
Cathedral
Action
Cost: $5
Reveal the top six cards of your deck. You may discard any revealed victory cards. Place two of the revealed cards into your hand. Trash the rest.
It's a relatively simple card that has an interesting change in usefulness throughout the game. I think it would be a fantastic card to open with, possible strictly better than Embassy as it doesn't give your opponent a silver and cycles your deck faster while trashing coppers and estates like nobody's business. However, it becomes MUCH less useful in the mid game as you'll probably have three cards out of the six revealed that you'd like to keep, potentially forcing you to trash valuable action cards. This is especially likely if you've been using it religiously (no pun intended
) early on in the game to make a slim deck. However, I think it's most interesting use comes in the late game when you can use it as a super-sifter, searching through the top six cards of your deck for the ones you really need, discarding upcoming green, and not really worrying too much about the possibility of having to trash action cards because at that point in the game you might not see them in the next reshuffle anyway. It basically gives you the ability to gamble crippling your long-term economy so that you can search for the cards you really need this turn. One change I've considered is making it force the player to discard all revealed victory cards, so that it couldn't be used to trash estates in the early game.
Anyway, any and all feedback would be appreciated, thanks in advance!
11
Variants and Fan Cards / Siege Engine: an "attack" (but not really) that targets reaction cards
« on: March 07, 2014, 02:48:43 pm »
Hey everyone, here's another card idea I've been thinking about.
The first thing to notice about this card is that it is NOT an attack. Like masquerade, it feels like an attack in that it forces your opponents to discard reaction cards, but it can't be defended against with cards like moat or horse traders because it itself isn't an attack card.
The next thing to notice is that it will play quite differently depending on what other action cards are in the kingdom. A lot of the time it will show up in kingdoms without any reaction cards. In this case its a relatively vanilla sifter, somewhat comparable to warehouse or oasis. I think its certainly powerful at $4 since its basically a laboratory as long as you have a victory card in hand to discard, but I don't think it would be too strong for its price point.
I originally designed this card however thinking of its use in kingdoms with good attack cards and reaction cards which effectively block the present attack cards. In this case Siege Engine serves as an enabler for your attack cards, allowing you to play the Siege Engine first, discard your opponent's moat, and then have an action to play your attack card on your defenseless opponents! If you have the bad luck to draw multiple Siege Engines but no attack cards, your Siege Engines' sifting ability gives you a chance to draw your missing attack cards to complete the combo.
All in all I think its a neat card that opens up some unique possibilities for reacting to the way your opponent is building his or her deck in games with reaction cards.
It also has a really weird/hilarious interaction with Tunnel.
Quote
Siege Engines
Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action
Each other player must discard a reaction card or reveal a hand with no reaction cards.
If no player discarded a card, +2 cards, then discard one card from your hand.
The first thing to notice about this card is that it is NOT an attack. Like masquerade, it feels like an attack in that it forces your opponents to discard reaction cards, but it can't be defended against with cards like moat or horse traders because it itself isn't an attack card.
The next thing to notice is that it will play quite differently depending on what other action cards are in the kingdom. A lot of the time it will show up in kingdoms without any reaction cards. In this case its a relatively vanilla sifter, somewhat comparable to warehouse or oasis. I think its certainly powerful at $4 since its basically a laboratory as long as you have a victory card in hand to discard, but I don't think it would be too strong for its price point.
I originally designed this card however thinking of its use in kingdoms with good attack cards and reaction cards which effectively block the present attack cards. In this case Siege Engine serves as an enabler for your attack cards, allowing you to play the Siege Engine first, discard your opponent's moat, and then have an action to play your attack card on your defenseless opponents! If you have the bad luck to draw multiple Siege Engines but no attack cards, your Siege Engines' sifting ability gives you a chance to draw your missing attack cards to complete the combo.
All in all I think its a neat card that opens up some unique possibilities for reacting to the way your opponent is building his or her deck in games with reaction cards.
It also has a really weird/hilarious interaction with Tunnel.
12
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: (Self-)Cursing Attack Card: Juggler
« on: March 06, 2014, 10:39:38 am »
A cantrip might actually be more powerful than +2 cards, if the difference between witch and familiar is any indication.
13
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: (Self-)Cursing Attack Card: Juggler
« on: March 06, 2014, 07:56:27 am »I'm thinking about replacing "+2 cards" with "+1 action". So then you could spam them easily but only every second one would actually hurt your opponents. You might keep all the Curses for + $2 each, so the card would be like a Mystic without the card draw.
It seems like keeping the curses for +$2 will generally be a bad idea, and would make this pretty weak for $4. Keep in mind that a Mystic without the card draw is basically the same as playing a silver (edge cases notwithstanding...). So is a silver that hands out curses to other players half of the time, and only gives you +$2 if you gain a curse yourself, really worth $4? I really like the idea however, but liked the original version which cost $5 better than this revision. Also, I absolutely love the name, as you are kind of "juggling" the curses, trying to maintain a balance between how many to discard or keep in your hand!
14
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New junk card
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:53:46 pm »I'm not sure how often they'd be any different than a normal curse, as I'd almost always just use a trasher to get rid of them on a board where one is present. Also, it's hard to come to any kind of judgment on them without seeing any "Tarnisher" action cards.Notice the clause: "If you trash this in any other way, put this into your hand."
Ah, that makes a lot more sense! Sorry for missing that, hmmmmm I think I like the idea! I'll need to give it some more thought, and maybe I'll be able to come up with some names too.
15
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New junk card
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:47:32 pm »
I'm not sure how often they'd be any different than a normal curse, as I'd almost always just use a trasher to get rid of them on a board where one is present. Also, it's hard to come to any kind of judgment on them without seeing any "Tarnisher" action cards.
16
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Crazy Alt-VP Card: Gives less points the more victory points you have
« on: February 27, 2014, 06:10:06 pm »There is a fatal flaw with this card as it is -- it isn't stable. What happens if you have no VP other than one Palace? Palace is worth 10VP... oh, you have 10, so it should be reduced in value to 9VP. But now your total VP is less than 10, so Palace shouldn't have been reduced. And so on.
That's not how I intended the card to work. As its written, you count your initial victory points once, then apply the vp reduction to all your palaces once. Is this not clear from the card text? That's why I used the word "initial" which I hoped implied that you only did the calculation/reduction step once. The far worse problem as I see it is not the mechanics of how the card works but the imbalance which Awaclus pointed out; the reduction isn't nearly drastic enough relative to its low cost.
I do agree with you in regard to its need for a minimum point value, probably 1.
Balancing the numbers would undoubtedly be really difficult, but I think it might be possible and would be pretty cool if we could figure it out!
17
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Crazy Alt-VP Card: Gives less points the more victory points you have
« on: February 27, 2014, 05:53:34 pm »Quote
Even if you buy 4 Provinces and 4 Palaces, you'll have more VP than the person who bought 4 Provinces and 4 Duchies.
Yeah, that's a definite problem and I now realize that this is almost certainly too powerful relative to its cost as it's now written. What do you think of the overall idea though? Is there a way to fix the cost/victory point imbalance, or is the concept just a bad one?
18
Variants and Fan Cards / Crazy Alt-VP Card: Gives less points the more victory points you have
« on: February 27, 2014, 05:05:51 pm »
Hey all, I'm back with another card idea that's been bouncing around in my head. Here it is:
Pretty weird, huh? The idea was to make a very powerful rush card that allowed a player to amass a lot of victory points quickly, but at some point capped and is unable to help you any further. Lets analyze how this card would actually play.
The first Palace you buy gives you ten victory points for $5, AMAZING! However, its not as good as it would first appear. In reality, your first palace only supplies nine victory points, since you add up your initial points (3 from estates + 10 from palace) and then reduce all your Palaces' value by 1. Each additional palace you buy is worth two points less than the previous Palace. Observe the following chart: 1 palace = 10 initial vp; 9 total points. 2 palaces = 20 initial vp; 16 total points. 3 palaces = 30 initial vp; 21 total points. 4 palaces = 40 initial vp; 24 actual points. 5 palaces = 50 initial vp; 25 actual points. Any palaces bought beyond the fifth one will actually decrease your total vps, as 6 palaces = 60 initial vp but each palace is now worth only 4 vp, for a total of 24 again. This creates a situation where a player who commits heavily to palaces will jump into the lead very quickly, but then has to end the game because the more palaces he or she has the lower their maximum vp cap is going to be.
I thought this card was interesting, but I don't really know what the optimum strategy for its use would be since it actually discourages you from amassing huge amounts of victory points. Any insights?
Quote
Palace
Cost: $5,
Victory
10 Victory Points
At the end of the game, after counting your initial victory points, this card is worth 1 victory point less for every ten victory points you have.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In games using Palace, whenever a player gains a victory card that is not a Palace, trash the top two Palace cards from the supply.
Pretty weird, huh? The idea was to make a very powerful rush card that allowed a player to amass a lot of victory points quickly, but at some point capped and is unable to help you any further. Lets analyze how this card would actually play.
The first Palace you buy gives you ten victory points for $5, AMAZING! However, its not as good as it would first appear. In reality, your first palace only supplies nine victory points, since you add up your initial points (3 from estates + 10 from palace) and then reduce all your Palaces' value by 1. Each additional palace you buy is worth two points less than the previous Palace. Observe the following chart: 1 palace = 10 initial vp; 9 total points. 2 palaces = 20 initial vp; 16 total points. 3 palaces = 30 initial vp; 21 total points. 4 palaces = 40 initial vp; 24 actual points. 5 palaces = 50 initial vp; 25 actual points. Any palaces bought beyond the fifth one will actually decrease your total vps, as 6 palaces = 60 initial vp but each palace is now worth only 4 vp, for a total of 24 again. This creates a situation where a player who commits heavily to palaces will jump into the lead very quickly, but then has to end the game because the more palaces he or she has the lower their maximum vp cap is going to be.
I thought this card was interesting, but I don't really know what the optimum strategy for its use would be since it actually discourages you from amassing huge amounts of victory points. Any insights?
19
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Interdict: A spinoff embargo and peddler
« on: February 12, 2014, 01:17:19 pm »How interdict works with ambassador if there is an interdict on the pile where cards have to return ?
That's a good question. I think that any answer would have to be in the FAQ for the card, but I think the way the rules work is that the returned cards would go on top of the interdict, and would then be gained by the other players. In a multiplayer game, this could result in some players gaining the returned card but not others.
While this may seem like a significant rules problem, I don't imagine it actually being too much of an issue at all because Interdict can only be placed on kingdom card supply piles and generally Ambassador is only played to return Estates, Coppers, or Curses so I don't foresee this situation occurring very often if at all.
That being said, I'd be interested to hear more opinions on what you all think would be a good starting cost and increase rate for this card. As popsofctown observed, the increase rate of $2 per buy can be pretty brutal at blocking piles; however as I noted in my previous comment there is always the option of using an Interdict in your hand to trash an Estate and gain an Interdict off a blocking pile. Also, reducing the price increase to $1 per buy makes it much more difficult to raise the price of Interdicts in your hand and capitalize off its trash for benefit self-synergy, which I really like. Thoughts?
20
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Interdict: A spinoff embargo and peddler
« on: February 09, 2014, 08:12:56 pm »It messes with the late game duchy dance in ways that may be severe -- in practice if you interdict the last province in a game with no +buy you could create a stalemate since neither player will want to remove it.
This is actually incorrect in a couple ways. First, the card is worded so that you can only place it on top of one supply pile of kingdom cards, which should exclude copper, provinces, etc. Also, even if the blocking ability were extended to the basic treasures and victory cards, its trash for benefit ability guarantees that even in a game with no +buy a player can play an interdict, trash an estate or something, gain an interdict blocking a supply pile, then buy whatever card was underneath the blocking interdict.
21
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Interdict: A spinoff embargo and peddler
« on: February 09, 2014, 12:48:07 am »
Thanks for the comments!
One other thing to keep in mind is that Interdict's trash for benefit ability provides both synergy and anti synergy with the card's other functions.
As already recognized, if you play some +buys you can trash a pricey Interdict to get a good action card or treasure.
However, as long as you don't play any buys first, you can play an Interdict and trash an estate to gain another Interdict sitting on top of a pile that you want to buy from this turn. So to some extent the fact that its a pretty brutal blocker is compensated for by the fact that a player who's been forced to buy a lot of Interdicts should be able to use them to gain more Interdicts off of blocked piles relatively easily. If I make the choice to change the cost increase to only +$1 per remaining buy, a player could even use Interdict to trash copper and clear a blocking Interdict off a supply pile.
One other thing to keep in mind is that Interdict's trash for benefit ability provides both synergy and anti synergy with the card's other functions.
As already recognized, if you play some +buys you can trash a pricey Interdict to get a good action card or treasure.
However, as long as you don't play any buys first, you can play an Interdict and trash an estate to gain another Interdict sitting on top of a pile that you want to buy from this turn. So to some extent the fact that its a pretty brutal blocker is compensated for by the fact that a player who's been forced to buy a lot of Interdicts should be able to use them to gain more Interdicts off of blocked piles relatively easily. If I make the choice to change the cost increase to only +$1 per remaining buy, a player could even use Interdict to trash copper and clear a blocking Interdict off a supply pile.
22
Variants and Fan Cards / Interdict: A spinoff embargo and peddler
« on: February 07, 2014, 07:22:33 pm »
Hey everyone, I've been thinking of cards for a custom set I'm making, and this is one of the more interesting cards I've made. It hasn't been playtested at all, so I'd appreciate any criticism or comments! Here's the card text:
Interdict
Action
Cost: $0*
+$2 or trash one card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
When you play this, place it on top of one supply pile of kingdom cards. This must be the next card bought or gained from that pile.
--------------------------
This costs $2 more per remaining buy you have, but not more than $6.
The idea behind this is that as long as it is the last card you buy on your turn, it will only cost $2. Then when you play it, in addition to the small benefit you receive, you get to place it on top of a supply pile you don't want your opponent to gain cards from next turn. Then, on their turn, if your opponent wants to have a chance to buy a card from that supply pile, he or she will have to spend $4 to first buy the interdict since they will have to have saved an extra buy for the card they actually want. The more cards they want to have the opportunity to buy from that pile on their turn, the more interdict is going to cost them.
It's also interesting to note that interdict, like peddler, combos very well with trash for benefit cards. As long as you play several +buy cards before your TFB card, you can turn an interdict into a gold or powerful action card.
And playing interdict gives you an option to trash for benefit, would you look at that!
As I said, any comments are welcome! Should I make its max cost higher, or is $6 a good cap? Are there any crazy combos I haven't noticed? Or is it just too weird mechanically? Also, I'm sure the wording could be cleaned up some. Overall though, I think it's a neat card and offers some interesting tactical choices and possibilities.
Interdict
Action
Cost: $0*
+$2 or trash one card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $1 more than the trashed card.
When you play this, place it on top of one supply pile of kingdom cards. This must be the next card bought or gained from that pile.
--------------------------
This costs $2 more per remaining buy you have, but not more than $6.
The idea behind this is that as long as it is the last card you buy on your turn, it will only cost $2. Then when you play it, in addition to the small benefit you receive, you get to place it on top of a supply pile you don't want your opponent to gain cards from next turn. Then, on their turn, if your opponent wants to have a chance to buy a card from that supply pile, he or she will have to spend $4 to first buy the interdict since they will have to have saved an extra buy for the card they actually want. The more cards they want to have the opportunity to buy from that pile on their turn, the more interdict is going to cost them.
It's also interesting to note that interdict, like peddler, combos very well with trash for benefit cards. As long as you play several +buy cards before your TFB card, you can turn an interdict into a gold or powerful action card.
And playing interdict gives you an option to trash for benefit, would you look at that!
As I said, any comments are welcome! Should I make its max cost higher, or is $6 a good cap? Are there any crazy combos I haven't noticed? Or is it just too weird mechanically? Also, I'm sure the wording could be cleaned up some. Overall though, I think it's a neat card and offers some interesting tactical choices and possibilities.
23
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan card: Fruit Market
« on: July 18, 2013, 02:22:44 pm »
I think I agree with Warfreak when he says that they aren't all awful at $2. The way I intended them was to equal various powerful "vanilla" when you put them together. So playing an apple vendor and a pear vendor is the same as playing a laboratory, in fact its a little better because then you can play another vendor without using the action from the pear vendor. Likewise, playing two pear vendors is the same as playing a village, a pear and an orange is a peddler, two pears and an orange is a bazaar, etc. I had actually thought of putting 20 of them in the pile and perhaps making the apple vendor cost more since it is slightly more powerful, but didn't want to unless I thought it was really necessary.
24
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Fan card: Fruit Market
« on: July 18, 2013, 10:08:19 am »
Thanks for pointing that out Warfreak, I went back and modified the cards to fix what you pointed out and make the wording consistent with the wording on Cultist. Also I'd be open to any name suggestions, I'd been having trouble coming up with a name for this kingdom deck and came up with the fruit market idea just a few minutes before the original post. I was aware of the card "Spice Merchant" and for that reason was probably going to change the name eventually anyway. Do you think that swapping out Merchant for Vendor would settle any confusion? If you have any other name ideas or thoughts on the balance of the deck I'd love to hear them!
25
Variants and Fan Cards / Fan card: Fruit Market
« on: July 18, 2013, 08:43:29 am »
Hey everyone, I had an idea for a kingdom card pile whose intended effect would be to allow players to kind of build their own market/grand market/bazaar card. You'll see what I mean when I explain it. It's like the knights deck in that there are several different cards in the deck and they are shuffled together and the topmost one is the only card available for purchase. So here are the cards, they all cost $2.
Apple Merchant
Action, Merchant
+2 cards
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Pear Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+1 action
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Orange Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+$1
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Strawberry Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+1 buy
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
I'm thinking that the deck would contain three apple and pear merchants and two orange and strawberry merchants. Also, I considered changing the wording of the special ability to be something like "Until the end of your turn, Merchants cost no actions to play." but thought that would probably be too strong. Any thoughts?
Apple Merchant
Action, Merchant
+2 cards
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Pear Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+1 action
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Orange Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+$1
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
Strawberry Merchant
Action, Merchant
+1 card
+1 buy
You may play a Merchant card from your hand.
I'm thinking that the deck would contain three apple and pear merchants and two orange and strawberry merchants. Also, I considered changing the wording of the special ability to be something like "Until the end of your turn, Merchants cost no actions to play." but thought that would probably be too strong. Any thoughts?
Pages: [1] 2