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 - Jeebus

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 49
1


Buying means you gain it.
Better: "During your buy phase you may buy this by removing 5 tokens from your Coffers. It cannot be gained in any other way."

2
Merchant Wagon is way too good. Choosing Sentry gives you +3 Cards, +1 Action, +1 Buy plus the trashing/sifting, plus kind of forcing your opponent to discard.

Beware that with self-trashers, nobody can gain them. Choose Mining Village and trash it. You're not able to set it aside, so it can't be gained. This way you get +3 Cards, +1 Buy, +2 Actions and +$2 every time you play Merchant Wagon until the Mining Villages run out!

I would recommend removing +2 Cards completely, or your opponent may discard just 1 card to gain it. Or maybe +1 Card, your opponent may discard 1.

3
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus
« on: December 01, 2018, 03:09:53 pm »
Ok, I made new versions of Panniers, Weaver, Privateer and Alderman (and did the cosmetic fix on Prowler).

4
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus
« on: December 01, 2018, 02:33:13 pm »
Quote
WEAVER - $5, Action
+3 Cards, +$3
Each other player draws 3 cards and discards 3 cards.

ALDERMAN - $5, Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck, then discard them. For each different type on the revealed cards, you may play an Action card from your hand that has that type.

Weaver is overpowered. The sifting for the opponents is nice but doesn't totally compensate as it decreases in value with several plays. I'd try it with 3 Cards and 2 Coins.

Thanks. Yes, I think you're right. I was worried about that. Maybe increasing the cost to $6 could work instead. Weaver could favor money strats over engines quite often. In those cases you won't play it several times. But with 3+ players you could get the sifting benefit from several players, with lower value each time.

Quote
Alderman is a giant Necropolis and far too weak.

Wow, you're absolutely right. I mean, sometimes it could let you play 3 Action cards, or even more with multiple-type-cards, but I guess often it would be 2. And sometimes only 1 (or 0 if you're really unlucky). I've been considering giving you a choice of playing cards from your hand and from the revealed cards, but it gets clunky. Maybe revealing 4 cards could work. Another option could be giving +1 Action; this eliminates the risk of stopping the chain, like the Tribute problem (although Golem has the same risk). A third option is just adding +$2, so that it's more useful.

5
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus
« on: December 01, 2018, 02:22:55 pm »
Quote
PRIVATEER - $6, Treasure - Attack
+$1, +1 Buy
When you play this, choose one: Discard your hand and +4 Cards; or gain a Silver to your hand. Each other player does the same.

PANNIERS - $2, Action - Reaction
+1 Card
---
When another player plays an Attack, you may play this from your hand, to return 1 card from your hand to the Supply.

MIDWAY - $3, Action
Say a type. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck, and put them back in any order. For each card that has the said type, choose one: +1 Action; or +1 Card.

PROWLER - $4, Action - Reaction
+1 Buy
Reveal cards from your deck until revealing a Treasure costing $1 or more. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.
---
When you gain a Treasure, you may discard this from your hand, to set the Treasure aside. If you did set it aside, play it.

These are really good! I agree with your comments on Privateer; it definitely needs either nerfed or made more expensive, also it could definitely use some kind of phrasing so that only players with five or more cards in hand discard.

Thanks for your feedback! Yes, Privateer needs a complete overhaul. I have considered many options now. The problem is also the lenght of the text, especially considering the clause about 5+ cards in hand, and the big coin symbol.

In the end I need to make it simpler. I thought that with a cost of $7 this might work:

PRIVATEER - $7, Treasure - Attack
+$1, +1 Buy
When you play this, discard your hand and +4 Cards, and each other player with 5 or more cards in hand does the same.


It's a bit similar to Minion, but the big difference is that you can't keep an engine going with it. You also can't defend against it with itself like you can with Minion. I think it could favor both money strategies and engines in certain kingdoms.

Quote
Panniers is good in concept, but on boards with no attacks it is much weaker than other cards that protect from attacks; +1 Card is a Ruin! It could maybe make a split pile with Privateer, you know, to also nerf Privateer since it wouldn't be available as quickly.

I don't want to make split piles, since that's a new mechanic.
I'm not sure about this one. Moat is also rarely buyable in a kingdom with no attacks. It can sometimes be used just for draw when there is an abundance of actions, but as I said this is rare. I can't make Panniers into a cantrip. Giving it +2 cards can work, but then I can't have the simple text of "play this from your hand". Maybe +1 Card, +$1. The coin would be like the +Action on Caravan Guard, it doesn't do anything when played out of turn. But the coin hardly makes it more buyable with no Attacks...?

Quote
Midway should say name and named instead of say and said.

I'm not so sure. Cards have names and types. "Name a card" means to say a card name. "Name a type" would mean that card types have names. To me, "say a type" introduces less confusion. There has been no official card that does this, so who knows how Donald would have done it.

Quote
Prowler doesn't need to say discard this from your hand, it can just say discard this.

Good call.

6
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion Card Image Generator v1.5
« on: December 01, 2018, 01:43:59 pm »
I'm noticing that when I download the image, some problem occurs in my browser (Vivaldi), so that from now on, every time I re-focus the browser, it freezes for a few fractions of a second. After downloading 10-15 cards yesterday, my browser took 5 seconds to unfreeze every time I re-focused from another window. That means it's unusable of course. I had to delete all settings, bookmarks etc and build it up again. I downloaded one card now, and it's starting to happen again. I have never had this problem with any other web application. I have no idea where the problem lies.

EDIT: I have finally isolated the problem. It's in the History. It doesn't help to clear the history in the browser, however. I have to delete the actualy History file (from C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\Vivaldi\User Data\Default) and let Vivaldi rebuild it.

7
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card ideas from Jeebus
« on: November 30, 2018, 07:03:35 pm »
Privateer is the one I'm most unsure about. You'll probably mostly choose the first option: you draw 4 more cards, potentially more Treasures, and you attack the others. Might be too good at $6. If you choose to gain a Silver, it's pretty much strictly better than Gold, but then you also give the other players a Silver in hand, so that gimps it enough maybe. (But fun for you if the others Moat, since they don't know what choice you will make.) The problem is if the first option is way better than Gold too; you only need to draw 2 coins worth of Treasure for it to be. Could this be costed $7?

8
Variants and Fan Cards / Card ideas from Jeebus
« on: November 30, 2018, 06:58:18 pm »
I thought of some card ideas, and here they are. To make them nicer to look at, I found some images and used Violet CLM's generator (thanks!).
The general idea was to think of more interesting stuff to do with just the base mechanics, so just given the base game rulebook.

I'd appreciate any feedback. If some of them are too similar to a fan card already created, I guess someone will tell me. None of these are tested!

Edit: Changed several of the cards. See text below for original versions.

                     

SHAFT - $3, Action
+4 Cards
Discard 1 card for each card drawn.

PANNIERS v1- $2, Action - Reaction
+1 Card
---
When another player plays an Attack, you may play this from your hand, to return 1 card from your hand to the Supply.

PANNIERS v2: added to top: +$1

WEAVER v1 - $5, Action
+3 Cards, +$3
Each other player draws 3 cards and discards 3 cards.

WEAVER v2: increased price to $6

LAW - $4, Action
Trash a card from your hand. If it costs $3 or more, +3 Cards. If it costs $4 or more, +1 Action.

MIDWAY - $3, Action
Say a type. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck, and put them back in any order. For each card that has the said type, choose one: +1 Action; or +1 Card.

PRIVATEER v1 - $6, Treasure - Attack
+$1, +1 Buy
When you play this, choose one: Discard your hand and +4 Cards; or gain a Silver to your hand. Each other player does the same.

PRIVATEER v2 - $7, Treasure - Attack
+$1, +1 Buy
When you play this, discard your hand and +4 Cards, and each other player with 5 or more cards in hand does the same.


ALDERMAN v1 - $5, Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck, then discard them. For each different type on the revealed cards, you may play an Action card from your hand that has that type.

ALDERMAN v2: added to top: +1 Action

PROWLER - $4, Action - Reaction
+1 Buy
Reveal cards from your deck until revealing a Treasure costing $1 or more. Put it into your hand and discard the rest.
---
When you gain a Treasure, you may discard this from your hand, to set the Treasure aside. If you did set it aside, play it.


9
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Asper's Cards
« on: November 30, 2018, 03:48:31 pm »


This started out as a suggestion for Kudasai's Barbarian Village. Originally I wanted it to gain a Copper in order to be topdecked, but the obscure lose-track rule makes this impossible.

You can just write:
When you gain this or discard it from play, you may put it onto your deck. If you do, gain a Copper.
The only difference is that it will still work after the Coppers are out.  :P

10
Rules Questions / Re: Strange Inventor question
« on: November 27, 2018, 12:16:46 am »
But you did gain a card up to $4, that Trader brought it shouldn't matter as like with IW, because Inventor would only check if something was gained, not giving you something depending if it was a certain card or whatnot. As long as you got something gained, Inventor can proceed to the next task. Some Rule Master may correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty certain this should be the case.

If a card actually said, "gain a card costing up to $4; if you did, cards cost $1 less", then if you played it and used Trader to gain a Silver instead, you would actually not get the cost reduction. This is exactly like Ironworks + Trader.

11
I don't know how best to phrase it instead, but I think you should avoid the phrasing "play X as a Treasure".  When Crown first appeared on the scene, some people got confused about how it worked (primarily when played with Storyteller) because they thought in terms of playing it as an action or playing it as a treasure, instead of thinking in terms of playing it in a particular phase and then doing what it told them to do in that phase.

Perhaps "play X (because it is a Treasure)" might be an alternative phrasing.

I definitely thought about that, but I thought that it was better to just go for the most straight-forward wording. You can play a Treasure, so you choose X as that Treasure. Hopefully the people who were confused about that (if they read this thread) know how it works now.

EDIT: Well, I changed it now anyway. :)

12
This wording seems more restrictive than the wording for Coffers or Villagers, which simply say that they can be spent in the appropriate phase. I took it to mean that you can't pay off debt in the middle of playing a Treasure. But then the ruling is instead that it can be done at any time in B2.

13
This is a summary of how it works with Coffers and Debt. If I'm mistaken or missing something, I'd appreciate feedback.

B1 = the first part of the Buy phase (play Treasures; spend Coffers tokens at any time)
B2 = the second part of the Buy phase (buy things; pay off debt before or after each buy EDIT: at any time)

Capitalism or Scepter:
Play Black Market in B1 - you can spend Coffers tokens in the middle. You can't pay off debt.
Play Storyteller in B1 - you can spend Coffers tokens in the middle. You can't pay off debt.

Innovation:
Buy and play Black Market in B2 - you can't spend Coffers tokens (you would have to do it in B1). You can't pay off debt in the middle, only before you buy the BM or after you've completely resolved the BM. EDIT: You can pay off debt in the middle.
Buy and play Storyteller in B2 - you can't spend Coffers tokens (you would have to do it in B1). You can't can pay off debt, as above.

Capitalism pluss Innovation:
Buy and play Black Market/Storyteller/Crown and as a result play Black Market (being a Treasure) in B2 - as above, you can't spend Coffers tokens or pay off debt. but you can pay off debt.
Buy and play Black Market/Storyteller/Crown and as a result play Storyteller (being a Treasure) in B2 - as above, you can't spend Coffers tokens or pay off debt. but you can pay off debt.

14
Rules Questions / Re: Capitalism and Black Market
« on: November 15, 2018, 07:01:33 pm »
To me it has always made sense* that Black Market works the way it does with playing Treasures and buying, and with Empires it makes sense that you can't buy from the BM deck when you're in debt.

As Donald said, the rule about playing all your Treasures before you buy cards, is a rule about timing. Although it's phrased with a "cannot", it's not meant as a prohibition. It just means that first you play any Treasures you want, then you buy any cards you want, in that order.

It's like the rule that you play your Treasures in your Buy phase: Effectively it tells you that you can't play them in your Action phase, but it's not meant as a prohibition. It's a timing rule. It just means that there are no rules allowing you to play Treasures in your Action phase. So if a card tells you that you can, you can.

The rule about debt, on the other hand, actually prohibits you from buying anything when you're in debt. It has nothing to do with timing or phases. There is nothing about this rule that signals that it matters what or when you buy, or how or when you accrue debt. If there's ever a card that lets you take debt in return for VP tokens in your Night phase, I'll expect these debt tokens to also prevent all types of buying.

* "always" meaning for the number of years that I've been aware of the two parts of the buy phase, which I've also included in my rules document

15
Rules Questions / Re: Not enough cards with Border Guard
« on: November 13, 2018, 06:00:18 pm »
However, Lantern says "it takes all 3" in parenthesis; which suggests that it's not a rule change but an explanation.

Parenthesis doesn't necessarily mean that it's just an explanation. Look at Prince, or even Bureaucrat. Without the text in parenthesis, those cards would work differently.

16
Rules Questions / Not enough cards with Border Guard
« on: November 13, 2018, 01:07:05 pm »
I assume that if you don't have enough cards to reveal 2 (or 3 with Lantern), then you can't take Lantern or Horn?

17
Rules Questions / Lose track rule in published rulebooks
« on: November 12, 2018, 07:44:48 pm »
I've noticed that Dark Ages is still the only rulebook that mentions the lose track rule. The 2nd edition Dominion rulebook has no mention of it either. Despite this, several cards are being released that rely on the rule to function, for instance Cargo Ship and Innovation. It seems that players without Dark Ages will have no way of knowing how several of these interactions work without looking online. Any thought on this?

18
Rules Questions / Re: A Couple of Buy Phase Clarifications
« on: November 12, 2018, 06:19:23 pm »
I should have mentioned "literal-minded programmer types" when I was arging against the awful "Possession lets you take other players' -$1 token" ruling.  :P

19
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance and Border Guard
« on: November 12, 2018, 06:05:43 pm »
I'm not sure if the conclusion has to be that Border Guard's ability is modified.

Lantern must have an implicit "instead of", otherwise it would mean that you reveal 5 cards and discard 3 cards when you play Border Guard. So Lantern must have the implicit text "Instead of revealing 2 cards and discarding 1, your Border Guards reveal 3 cards and discard 2".

This could be seen as a shape-shifting thing. But it could just as easily be seen as an Enchantress-like replacement: "Instead of doing A, do B" kind of implies that whenever you would do A, you do B instead.

The difference here is that even if your "instead of" wording, it doesn't involve "when you play". It doesn't matter if it has an "instead" or not. It matters if it has a "when you play" or not.

Yes, with "when you play" (meaning "when you would play") there would be no question. I'm just saying, as it is, I think it's possible to interpret it both ways, since the text doesn't explicitly say how it works.

But, Envious has the same wording as Lantern, and in another thread I just found, I was pretty sure that Envious shapeshifts other cards. :P I don't think Donald has ever weighed in on Envious though (probably because it doesn't matter in practice). But going by wording alone, Lantern, Envious and Coppersmith should all be shapershifters or not.

20
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance and Border Guard
« on: November 12, 2018, 04:19:49 pm »
I'm not sure if the conclusion has to be that Border Guard's ability is modified.

Lantern must have an implicit "instead of", otherwise it would mean that you reveal 5 cards and discard 3 cards when you play Border Guard. So Lantern must have the implicit text "Instead of revealing 2 cards and discarding 1, your Border Guards reveal 3 cards and discard 2".

This could be seen as a shape-shifting thing. But it could just as easily be seen as an Enchantress-like replacement: "Instead of doing A, do B" kind of implies that whenever you would do A, you do B instead.


21
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance and Border Guard
« on: November 12, 2018, 03:52:26 pm »
This ruling actually has another consequence: If you play a Border Guard that isn't yours, it's not affected by your Lantern.

Play Throne Room on Band of Misfits, choose Embargo. Play Band of Misfits from the trash, choose Border Guard. Lantern doesn't affect it, since it's not yours anymore.


22
Regarding Innovation: Will Villa and Ironworks lose track if you use Innovation's effect?

Ironworks: Ironworks doesn't try to move the card after it is gained, so loose track doesn't really apply. All it does is determining the card's type(s), which should not normally be a problem, but I assume there might be edge cases where it is. So if it is a Band of Misfits that Innovation plays as a Mill, Ironworks will see it as Victory-Action; same if it copies an Island.

If you play BoM as Island, it's set aside and reverts to Bom before Ironworks checks it, right?

23
Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: November 10, 2018, 06:17:09 pm »
Then I have this tentative description:

After end-game is triggered, all players who have bought Fleet gets an extra turn. The active player (the last player to take a regular turn) gets their Fleet turn last. Otherwise normal turn order rules apply: Any extra turns already in queue (from Outpost, Possession or Mission) - which would otherwise not be played - are played, starting with the active player. So are any extra turns produced during this extra round. Each player can order their extra turns. When the last Fleet turn has been played, the game ends and no more extra turns are played.

24
Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: November 10, 2018, 02:18:22 pm »
Maybe Donald can settle what exactly happens.

Alice, Bob and Clara all buy Fleet. Alice plays Possession. Bob possessed by Alice triggers end-game. In what order do the Fleet turns go? The rulebook says: "The extra turns go in order starting with the next player after the one that just took a turn." Does that mean it's Clara, Alice, Bob? Or does the game extend normally with 1 round - Bob, Clara, Alice?

25
Rules Questions / Re: Fleet extra turns
« on: November 10, 2018, 02:16:29 pm »
It's not different, which is why it's possible to think of it that way without changing any rules. But it does mean that you no longer need to worry about "extra" turns. Rather than count the number of turns each person took, and then subtract the ones that counted as "extra", you simply look at who was the start player, and where in turn order did the game end. I mean, that's what people do in reality; no one is actually counting turns IRL.

I feel like it would have been much better to have this conversation in person, because I think there are some basic misunderstandings.

You're right that players don't have to count turns, but I never suggested that they do. But when the game ends in a player's extra turn from Possession, we can't just check where that player is in turn order. We need to specifically disregard that extra turn.

If Fleet turns count as extra turns, it means we can disregard them at the end of the game (and so just check where the game-end triggering player was in turn order, just like you said). If Fleet turns don't count as extra turn, it means we need a special extra rule to say that we should still disregard them when doing that. You can't simply look at who was start player and where in turn order the game ended, because that would include the Fleet turns. You need that extra rule. That's all I was saying.

Quote
Like Donald said, the rule book does say that the turns count as extra turns. But I don't see why it's an either/or between that and creating an extra round.

Because if we count them as extra turns, we can't follow your 3-point model of extending the game with 1 round. The reason is that per normal rules the game-ending player would get their extra turn first, which is not how Fleet is supposed to work. So then we do need to add the extra rule that the game-ending player gets their Fleet turn last, and we don't need the extra rule that turns in the final round dont't count for tie breaker.

Quote
Fleet says there's an extra round, but that doesn't mean you need to start with player B. You don't just immediately end the current round because Provinces ran out, and then start the new, extra round. Instead, because the game is one round longer than normal, you keep going with the current round, and go exactly 1 more round; as in each player gets a final turn (but only players with Fleet, and those turns don't hurt you in the tie breaker).

So to try and diagram this; looking at a game with Fleet that only lasted 4 normal rounds. B buys the last Province on turn 4, and everyone bought Fleet.

Your latter case (not what happens):

Round 1: A, B, C, D
Round 2: A, B, C, D
Round 3: A, B, C, D
Round 4: A, B
Round 5: A, B, C, D

That does not follow my latter case at all. My cases were about Possession turns, and the latter one was in accordance with your explanation. I was saying that with Possession turns, it actually does matter if we add extra turns or extend the game with an extra round. I was thinking that extending the game with 1 round would mean that the game continues with the next player who would normally have a turn if the game hadn't ended (so player B in Ingix's scenario):

Round 4) A, B, C, D, E, F
Round 5) A, [B poss. by A], [C poss. by B*], B, C, D, E, F
Round 6) A

But I guess we could still follow the Fleet FAQ literally ("The extra turns go in order starting with the next player after the one that just took a turn"), and then it would be player D. The problem with that is that, following your preferred model, we get a round that doesn't follow normal turn order:
Round 4) A, B, C, D, E, F
Round 5) A, [B poss. by A], [C poss. by B*], D, E, F
Round 6) A, B, C

*triggers end-game

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 49

Page created in 0.168 seconds with 18 queries.