Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Homage to the Best Card

« on: Today at 10:37:37 am »

This thread has only 1 page. Doesn't everyone always click the "all" link when opening this thread?

2

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: Today at 10:27:11 am »

Emissary, $4
Action - Attack
For each other player, choose one: +2 cards; or gain a Curse to your hand.
Pass each other player a card from your hand.

This seems interesting... but probably too strong. At the start, it's an Ambassador that only returns 1 card instead of 2, but also gives +2 cards, which is huge. Once you have gotten rid of your Estates, and maybe some Coppers, it can become a Sea Hag. It's very close to strictly better than Sea Hag... of course your opponents gaining a Curse to their hand instead of on top of their deck is not as painful for them; but I think the +2 cards + Ambassador effect more than makes up for that.  I wonder if it's a good strength for a .

Oh, and that analysis was only for 2 player. In 3 player, it is actually just Ambassador except with +4 cards, if you choose that option. In 4 player, it is an Ambassador that returns 3 cards instead of 2, and has +6 cards. I think it's completely broken in 4 player, even at .

3

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 23, 2019, 03:51:04 pm »

It just occurred to me that that the net effects of this card are very similar to this other card:


+1 Action
At the start of your next turn, +1 Card, +1 Action.
This turn, you may top-deck one action card when you discard it from play.

“Play a card” this turn is basically the same as +1 Action. Play a set-aside Card next turn is basically the same as +1 Card, +1 Action next turn.

So it’s like a Ghost Town combined with a Scheme. But a little weaker than that because of restrictions.

4

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 23, 2019, 03:28:53 pm »

Quote from Donald X on his attempt to make basically this same card for Seaside:

There was a now-and-later Throne Room variant. Play an Action, play it again next turn. It was both confusing and weak. What if you use it on a duration card? How long does it stay on the table? It could have said "non-duration," but that's pretty sad in a set with 8 duration cards. And did I mention it was weak? It left before development started.

5

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 23, 2019, 03:26:31 pm »

Just checking: if I play this card and select Band of Misfits, and use Band of Misfits as a Duration, this card's Duration effect is to play Band of Misfits from the play area, right?

I don’t think BoM would ever get moved into play; this it would never become the card it is being played as. BoM expects itself to be in play when following its instructions. If it is instead set aside; it will have lost track. See recent thread in rules forum. This is assuming that he keeps the card as “invoke” and not “play”. Of course he could also borrow Necromancer wording and say “play the card; leaving it set aside”.

6

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 23, 2019, 05:31:00 am »

I for one had no idea until know about the negative/racist implications of that term; so I have been educated today.

7

Feedback / Re: Abusive Players

« on: March 22, 2019, 08:37:05 pm »

They don’t have the staff necessary to deal with such a reporting system.

Well, they ought to have. You might as well say they don't have the staff necessary to file annual accounts! Safeguarding is something every business should regard as indispensable.

In any case, is stuff like that actually common? How often would such a complaint come in, and how long would it take to deal with?

I think there would be a fair amount of complaints; at the least a lot more than there are actual problems. The types of people who are being quoted above are also likely the types of people who would abuse a reporting system to report people in an effort to troll them.

8

Feedback / Re: Abusive Players

« on: March 22, 2019, 08:16:44 pm »

To me, that feels like it goes beyond mere discourtesy or subjective offensiveness, and into more extremely objectionable territory. Safeguarding policies ought to mean there's a way to report such behaviour directly, rather than relying on the admins spotting it if the perpetrator does it repeatedly.

If someone behaves in the way reported (and the admins can presumably check the report's accuracy) then one time is one time too many. It shouldn't have to form part of a pattern of behaviour before something's done.

They don’t have the staff necessary to deal with such a reporting system.

9

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 22, 2019, 07:59:48 pm »

If Wharf were not a Duration; it would be:

+4 Cards
+2 Buys

This is a much stronger version of Hunting Grounds; a $6 card.

Also look at Caravan vs Laboratory. Caravan costs $4 instead of $5 because you get that extra card next turn instead of this turn.

Duration’s as a whole are weaker than the same thing in non-Duration form. This is both because it is generally better to get something this turn than it is to get the same thing next turn; and because by staying out in play; Duration cards miss the shuffle more. You also need twice as many of them if you want to play one every turn.

10

Dominion: Renaissance Previews / Re: Artifact Origin cards as a card type

« on: March 22, 2019, 05:33:03 pm »

There is a special rule about Reactions, although not formalized. It's that you can resolve a Reaction card in your hand several times to the same event. That's not a general rule, because then you would get infinite VP with a Goons in play.

EDIT: Well, I kind of take it back. You could state this rule as pertaining to all cards that are resolved in your hand. I don't think any other cards than Reactions can be resolved when they're in your hand.

As I recall, the rule about multiple-revealing is specific to the idea that it is in your hand; this is why you can't reveal a Tunnel repeatedly for multiple Gold when you discard it. It's stems from the fact that your hand is hidden; and thus other players can't tell whether you were revealing the same card twice, or 2 different cards once each. But I'm not aware of this being unique to reaction specifically.

It's a moot question though, as there is no printed non-reaction that says "when, X, you may reveal this from your hand for Y." If such a card did exist though, it would be hard to argue that the intention is that because it's not a reaction, you aren't allowed to reveal it from your hand.

11

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Victory Card design considerations?

« on: March 22, 2019, 05:23:34 pm »

Was there ever any consideration of putting a Victory Point value (similar to the Treasure Value in the upper corners of the Victory Cards? (yes, there would be ? for those accumulative Victory cards like Gardens, etc).

No, no interest. A version of Base Cards put VP in the lower right corners, but there's no point to that.

Well the version that did that did not have the VP value in the middle of the card like the second edition cards do. So there was a point to having it in the corner for those. Same for the treasures.

Makes the art look nicer that way; but harder to quickly see how many points stuff is worth.

12

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Indian Reservation

« on: March 22, 2019, 05:16:14 pm »

ClouduHieh brings up an interesting point.. I think we all interpreted the text as "Set aside a non-Duration card from your hand", but it doesn't specify where the set-aside card comes from! If it is indeed intended to be set aside from the Supply, instead of from your hand, then it is a very different (and much stronger) card!

If you set it aside from your hand, then it's just a weaker Throne Room. If you set it aside from the supply, it's more like a duration-double Band of Misfits. And indeed the text would need to specify what to do with the played card... I think by default, you would just clean it up to your discard pile like other played cards; which would get you the card without technically "gaining" int... but then again, the card says "invoke" instead of "play"; so it probably wouldn't go to your in-play area.

So what is the intention?

13

Rules Questions / Re: Throne Room-Band of Misfits-Embargo and the lose track rule

« on: March 22, 2019, 05:08:19 pm »

I covered that in my last post: If at any point a card is not where an ability expects it to be, the ability loses track of it.

This includes an on-play ability on a card expecting that card to be in play (like when a card is played from the trash).

But yes, the rest follows from:
1) An ability can never "get track" again.
2) We're talking about an ability of a card, that is all the instructions that the card does when the ability is triggered. The ability keeps tracking the card all the way until it's done being resolved. Again, see the example with a Princed Reserve card.

Yes, but to use "at any point", you have to have a "starting from when". As in, it doesn't matter if the card was in a different place 3 turns ago. Or the last time your card was played. It matters if has been in an unexpected place since your effect first started caring about where it was.

14

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 22, 2019, 02:50:09 pm »

Hi! Been Lurking here for a while and finally have some cards to show!



This is supposed to be an Island variant that lets other players Island things for free... for a Curse cost. I've been wondering whether this is an Attack or not- if the negative effect is optional it can't be right?

Welcome!

You're correct, shouldn't be an attack because other players can always choose to not be affected; so they would only be affected when it is helpful to them. But I don't see when they would ever choose it... setting aside a card at the cost of gaining a Curse just has the net effect of -1; with no change at all to the number of junk cards in their deck. Unless the Curses have already run out; it just doesn't seem like your opponents would ever choose to do the optional effect.

It seems way weaker than Island, almost strictly so. Instead of getting to set aside an Estate, you get to trash a Curse, which is way more situational. In plenty of games with this card, Curses won't even ever be gained by anyone. So it ends up largely being an Island without the setting aside another card part.

15

Dominion General Discussion / Re: Base Card set 2nd Edition time frame?

« on: March 22, 2019, 02:37:31 pm »

This was already done, in the second printing of the base cards set.

See the pictures on the back of the box here:

16

Rules Questions / Re: Throne Room-Band of Misfits-Embargo and the lose track rule

« on: March 22, 2019, 02:29:55 pm »

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

Fair enough. But we do know that a card that is covered and then uncovered is still lost. So being where it expects at the time you try to move it isn't enough; it has to have been in the expected place continually since... hmm, not sure when that duration actually begins. I guess since the card was first referred to by the card doing the effect?

It's not a duration thing - it's just lost if it was ever covered since it was placed in the place that it's looking for it, right?

"since it was placed in the place that it's looking for it" is the duration then. I mean duration as in a period of time, not as in the card type, in case that was a source of confusion.

But I don't think that's the correct duration, because in the example of Junk Room / Mining Village, the place it it looking for it is in the trash, and the card is in the trash, and has been in the trash since it first went to the trash. But it still has lost track. I think that's because the duration is "since the card looking for it first knew where it was". So in this case, from the moment that Junk Room said to play Mining Village, if Mining Village ever moves somewhere (for a reason other than Junk Room making it move, like when it moves it into play), then Junk Room loses track of it and cannot un-lose track of it.

17

Rules Questions / Re: Throne Room-Band of Misfits-Embargo and the lose track rule

« on: March 22, 2019, 01:27:03 pm »

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one.

The effect expects the card to be on top of the pile. It's not - there's something else above it.

Fair enough. But we do know that a card that is covered and then uncovered is still lost. So being where it expects at the time you try to move it isn't enough; it has to have been in the expected place continually since... hmm, not sure when that duration actually begins. I guess since the card was first referred to by the card doing the effect?

18

Rules Questions / Re: Throne Room-Band of Misfits-Embargo and the lose track rule

« on: March 22, 2019, 11:49:28 am »

In rare circumstances an effect may try to move a card that is not where that effect expects the card to be. In those cases the card does not move - the effect has "lost track" of the card.

I think this rule is incompletely worded, based on what Donald has said. It doesn't mention a card being covered up at all, for one. I think the wording there is just the simplest and most common situation; but the full rule says that a card that is moved or covered up is lost track of; not just a card that isn't where the effect expects it to be.

Also, once you lose track, you can't un-lose track. In the Junk Room / Mining Village examples, the Junk Room loses track of Mining Village as soon as Mining Village trashes itself (even if the rule only dealt with it not being where it expects it to be... at that moment it expects it to be in play, but it is in the trash). So for Junk Room to pull it out of the trash, it would have to un-lose track of it later.

19

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 22, 2019, 10:12:13 am »

[Wood Witch]

Well, that's annoyingly close to my entry.

Devil's Bargain
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card
Look at the top card of your deck.  You may put it in your hand.  If you do, +1 Action, and gain a curse.

I don’t see how they are similar at all.... Wood Witch is a cantrip that sometimes gives opponents a Curse. Devil’s Bargain is a cheap lab that self-curses as a penalty. I think Devil’s Bargain is way too weak; it’s a Ruined Library if you don’t take the Curse. Might be fine if you always got the action. Even then, probably a $2.

+1 Card
+1 Action

Look at the top card of your deck. You may gain a Curse, for +1 Card.

But isn't your intention that if you pile down the curse cards, it is an Libary? I think that makes the card more interesting. Piling down the curses all by yourself is painfull, so be rewarded for that is interesting play. Deffintly if there are other curse cards in the Kingdom

I assume you mean Laboratory? It might be fine to not have the Lab-effect be conditional on successfully gaining the Curse; but the problem is in games where Curses can run out in any other way, this becomes nothing but a cheaper Laboratory.

I agree the current version is too weak, but this makes the decision too trivial. It doesn't hurt to get it, and the decision whether to get the Curse should usually be simple, of the type Watchtower in hand? Need more trashing fodder for Forager? etc. I think making it actively hurt when you don't get the Curse makes for better design, but it needs to be stronger and it somehow needs to deal with the case where Curses have run out.

EDIT: Just saw that the original card's wording works if Curses run out, so that's good? Though it becomes a mindless pickup after Curses run out another way.

I think things like Watchtower are just special combos, just like with Cache or Treasure Trove. In other cases, I think it will be something you are rarely willing to do; which makes it maybe about on par with Pearl Diver... a cantrip that's barely better than just a cantrip. But maybe it's too good when it happens to be good.

20

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 22, 2019, 10:05:24 am »

Cursed Estate, Victory $4
1Vp
Whenever you gain this card, all other players gain a curse

With Baker in the kingdom you don't want to be the player with the 5/2 split. There is a reason that Ill-gotten Gains costs $5. With Baron/Squire/Herbalist/Storeroom/Pawn/Peasant this can lead to a quick Estate run.

I dont know what the baker has to do with this?

With Baker in the kingdom, a 4/4 opening is possible, which means two Cursed Estates.

I'm almost sure that opening two Cursed Estates is a horrible move. IGG provides reliability to hit , for Duchies. If you bought nothing but Cursed Estates, while your opponent played normally, you would be left with a deck that has 18 junk cards, only 7 of which are Copper, while your opponent has 8 junk cards, and whatever other normal stuff he's been doing. You'd be up by 16 points, sure, but you've only drained 1 pile; and you have absolutely no economy available to try to drain 2 more. You'd have to buy 2 Curses yourself if you want the fastest 3-pile.

I tought of that. Maybe it should be more this:
Cursed Estate, Victory $4
1Vp
Whenever you gain this card, all other players gain a curse
-
Setup: this kingdompile has 10 cards

My post was only meant to show why the card isn't overpowered when you can open 4/4; I think it is actually fine as-is. Probably pretty weak; but it has some interesting uses.

21

Rules Questions / Re: Throne Room-Band of Misfits-Embargo and the lose track rule

« on: March 22, 2019, 10:01:25 am »

If there was a card Junk Room, "Play an Action card from your hand, trash it, then play it again", it would put the card into play the second time as long as it was able to trash it. (If the card trashed itself, Junk Room would lose track of it before it could trash it.) This is the reason Vassal and Golem put cards into play.

If Junk Room plays Mining Village, then MV trashes itself, then JR's trashing of MV fails.

But can JR then fish MV from the trash for the second play? After all, MV is in the trash, exactly where JR expects it. By the exact wording of lose track item 1, each effect individually checks where stuff is: In rare circumstances an effect may try to move a card that is not where that effect expects the card to be. In those cases the card does not move - the effect has "lost track" of the card.

No, because the card has moved. The fact that it moved to where Junk Room expected doesn't matter. The Lose Track rule is intentionally broad in this way, as to not have to add specifics to handle different situations. It says Lose Track happens if a card is moved (or covered up).

22

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 21, 2019, 06:52:30 pm »

[Wood Witch]

Well, that's annoyingly close to my entry.

Devil's Bargain
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card
Look at the top card of your deck.  You may put it in your hand.  If you do, +1 Action, and gain a curse.

I don’t see how they are similar at all.... Wood Witch is a cantrip that sometimes gives opponents a Curse. Devil’s Bargain is a cheap lab that self-curses as a penalty. I think Devil’s Bargain is way too weak; it’s a Ruined Library if you don’t take the Curse. Might be fine if you always got the action. Even then, probably a $2.

+1 Card
+1 Action

Look at the top card of your deck. You may gain a Curse, for +1 Card.

23

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 21, 2019, 01:20:56 pm »

My attempt at a dual type Curse-ish card. You can buy it and then trash it later, but the Curse-gaining makes it more of a pain to do so. Overall, you'll have to decide if the extra +Action is worth it. The type is "Dark" instead of Curse to avoid any confusion.

I agree with what the others said. Given that you never get rid of the negative VP this is worth, I think it should just say "When you gain this, each other player gets +1VP" and avoid the type weirdness completely. Obviously it won't fit the brief anymore, but it will be a better card.

Well you can get rid of the -, you just have to "trash it twice". I think in terms of mechanics and theme, it's much better to not give a token to other players. In terms of balance, this card does suffer from the same issue as any VP-as-a-penalty card.. which is that sometimes 1 means nothing at all to the final score, and sometimes it means everything.

The new type seems fine; as long as it were with a broader set where the new type had actual meaning.

24

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: March 21, 2019, 10:58:51 am »

Cursed Estate, Victory $4
1Vp
Whenever you gain this card, all other players gain a curse

With Baker in the kingdom you don't want to be the player with the 5/2 split. There is a reason that Ill-gotten Gains costs $5. With Baron/Squire/Herbalist/Storeroom/Pawn/Peasant this can lead to a quick Estate run.

I dont know what the baker has to do with this?

With Baker in the kingdom, a 4/4 opening is possible, which means two Cursed Estates.

I'm almost sure that opening two Cursed Estates is a horrible move. IGG provides reliability to hit , for Duchies. If you bought nothing but Cursed Estates, while your opponent played normally, you would be left with a deck that has 18 junk cards, only 7 of which are Copper, while your opponent has 8 junk cards, and whatever other normal stuff he's been doing. You'd be up by 16 points, sure, but you've only drained 1 pile; and you have absolutely no economy available to try to drain 2 more. You'd have to buy 2 Curses yourself if you want the fastest 3-pile.

25

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Contest #23: Gains Curses

« on: March 21, 2019, 10:05:50 am »

The last clause is there to prevent Blackmailer from becoming OP when the Curses run out.

The last clause isn't necessary, though could be nice to have as an italics/parenthesized reminder. By regular Dominion rules, you can always choose an option that isn't possible; see Torturer after Curses have run out, or with an empty hand.

This card seems weak. It's a weaker version of Jester, and it costs less, but it seems way weaker. Any time this hits Copper, a Victory card, or any other Junk; it is just a terminal Silver with no other benefit, which is worse than a card. You can't stack it to give out multiple Curses, because of the top-decked Curse. But I think it will rarely give out Curses; unless your opponent already has a strong engine that can plow through Curses, they won't choose that option, and instead the card will mostly read "+. You may gain a copy of the top card of your opponent's deck." If you consider gaining a card very similar to your opponent trashing that same card; then this is almost a strictly weaker version of Swindler.

Do you think that bumping up its cost to $5 but making it non-terminal would balance it?

I think it would be better balanced. Because it's still weak when your opponent's deck is mostly Copper and Estate, you don't want one early anyway, so the cost difference won't matter as much as it would normally. As a non-terminal, it would act more like a Silver-with-a-bonus, and the bonus seems to me to be about on-par with the other Silver-with-a-bonuses at . I still think it is unlikely to give out Curses, as most opponents will choose to let you gain a copy most of the time instead.