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 - Donald X.

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 190
51
Rules Questions / Re: Deluded + Black Market
« on: July 23, 2018, 01:48:53 pm »
I am aware of this, but still maintain that it would be way less confusing as: "While you have this, you may not buy action cards. Return this during your Clean-Up phase." But it can't be that because you might be too happy getting it with Cursed Village (I assume; though other Hexes do nothing with Cursed Village as well, so it doesn't seem terrible).
It's just a classic case of pursuing the functionality I wanted rather than simplicity.

52
You can receive Swamp's Gift several times per turn, but Field's Gift is kept until clean-up in front of you. So it would miss a shuffle of the Boons pile.

I guess the point there is to remind you that you get the +?
Yes.

53
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 21, 2018, 02:19:34 pm »
Do you playtest digitally or physically?

What art do you use on cards when playtesting?
Both; in the early days I had a program I wrote, then Doug Z. made isotropic.

I google up images, all of them entirely sensible. Mostly the same images were used in isotropic, so many people are familiar with the pre-Dark Ages ones.

The physical version of Nocturne was not playtested on dominion.games, it was already done; all that was playtested there was the online functionality.

54
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 21, 2018, 03:14:55 am »
I do not want to see them. You can share them with other people in the variants forum J Reggie linked to, or on reddit or BGG or elsewhere. I specifically do not go to the variants forum, and all fan-made cards posted on dominionstrategy should go there and nowhere else.

So this response doesn't sound harsh and villain-spawning like Mr. Incredible's, I'll offer this additional perspective that might help. In any creative endeavor, it can be hard to trace where an idea truly originated. If Donald X. read the variants forum, there would always be a question of whether some future canon Dominion card was inspired by something he read there without him realizing it. I'm sure you'd still be honored if that happened even without any actual recognition, but others might be disappointed that he forgot. In the extreme, someone could accuse Donald X. of ripping off their variant with his new expansion, which is not the kind of publicity he wants.

I think we all have to remember that we have different roles here. For Donald X., as accessible as he is to us here, Dominion is not just something he does for fun; it's a job for him. Like anyone, he wants to do his job well, and that involves being responsible about the origins of ideas that he will profit off of. Hence the firewall keeping the variants and fan cards in that subforum, which allows him to roam freely about these discussion boards and participate in our discussions about his game.
And I mean, I've had the same experience from the other side. Years ago I made a homemade Netrunner expansion. Then FFG got the rights to Netrunner and started making new products. I was the Dominion guy, and FFG was publishing one of my games too. I said hey, I have a Netrunner expansion. They weren't interested in seeing it. They had their own Netrunner cards to make.

55
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 20, 2018, 04:23:12 pm »
Well I figured you would like to make them up on your own. Would you like to see a few of my favorites from snowline then? I might spark your creativity for a new expansion. In fact I haven’t really mentioned too much to anyone on the forum about snowline. Only my close friends. So you would be the one of the first on the forum.
I do not want to see them. You can share them with other people in the variants forum J Reggie linked to, or on reddit or BGG or elsewhere. I specifically do not go to the variants forum, and all fan-made cards posted on dominionstrategy should go there and nowhere else.

56
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 20, 2018, 04:30:07 am »
Do you ever get players who want to give you their ideas for the a fan based dominion expansion? And to just give you all their cards info completely for free. I mean as in when it comes down to it it’s still your game.
Yes this is a thing that has happened.

I like making up the cards. I haven't been willing to give that up. Getting a card from someone else still means playtesting it and polishing it. I'd rather do that work on cards I got to make up. A few friends have gotten to contribute a card and well that group doesn't seem likely to get larger.

57
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: July 19, 2018, 06:52:36 pm »
But it is not that simple. In general the rule cannot be "you cannot call Royal Carriage on a card that has left and re-entered play": I can Procession a Fortress and then play that Fortress again. It has left and re-entered play. Noone would doubt that it is eligible for Royal Carriage. So the real question is: since when should the card I want to replay not have left play? The natural answer to which seems to be: Since it was last played. But, behold: The Estate in majiponi's example has not left play since it was last played (which was by the other Estate-Crown), so that does not seem to be the rule. So what is the rule?

This is what my second response in this thread was about. It's a question about English, not about Dominion. "Are you still in play" works the same was as "are you still at work"? There's an implied duration in the question. It's not "since it was last played", because you will ALWAYS "still be" where you "last went".

I believe the natural reading is, as mentioned in my other reply, "has it not left play since it was put into play by the same act of playing it that was referred to by the 'directly after you finish playing an Action card'?"

In other words, Royal Carriage refers to "playing an Action card". The moment that action card was played is the start of your duration. If it left play since then, you cannot call Royal Carriage.

The "act of playing it that was referred to" doesn't always put it into play. In the simple situation, you can Throne a card, play it a first time, play it a second time (without putting it into play again, because it's already in play), and then call Royal Carriage. So it has not left play since the act of playing it that triggered Royal Carriage was initiated, but that act of playing it didn't put it into play.

(The same is the case in the scenario in the OP, except that it's in Sally's play area when that happens.)

That's fine; my idea doesn't depend on the act having put it into play. What matters is if it left play between that act and now. (Left play includes never having been in play, like with Throne Room + Feast).

So... this implies that in the OP scenario majiponi can call Royal Carriage?

Ooooh... I misread (and it seems as though Donald may have misread) something. I didn't realize that the question was dealing with having played Estate again after it was in Sally's play area. I thought the idea was to call Royal Carriage on your original play of the Estate; the one that you played before you did all the crazy stuff to move it over to Sally.

So I see now that we're talking about playing the Estate-as-Caravan (as confirmed by the other thread), and wanting to call Royal Carriage on that final play. Indeed it has not moved or left play since the moment you played it the last time... I don't see why you can't call Royal Carriage to play it again in this case.

Donald's response says "It hasn't moved since Sally played it, but it has moved since you played it." Which implies that he had the same confusion I had.

*Edit* I think Donald's more recent reply to me agrees with this:

Quote
If it left play and got replayed, it's not "still in play" from the first time you played it. However it's "still in play" from the 2nd time, and so you could Royal Carriage that, to do what that does.

So you can't call Royal Carriage to play Estate-as-Crown from your original play; because it has left play since you did that. But you CAN call Royal Carriage to play Estate-as-Caravan, because it has not moved since you played Estate-as-Caravan.
I see. Note: this is still just an issue for Inheritance, Band of Misfits, Overlord.

When Royal Carriage refers to "still in play," it implicitly means in your own personal play area. That's my obscure ruling that will have no effect except to confuse people who read the wiki or look at Punchball's document.

Throne Room would normally put Estate3 into play in your own personal play area. It has lost track of it and fails to do that. This doesn't prevent you from playing it. But Royal Carriage can't be used there. That's not what Royal Carriage meant by "still in play."

58
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: July 19, 2018, 06:41:32 pm »
My current thinking is:

How about losing track slighty harder as a solution?  If the current location of the card can't be determined without 'cheating', it retains the identity it had when last its location was known.
It is going to be hard for me to make the leap to "okay I am changing the rules; here is the rule almost no-one will know, that will never come up, but maybe, just maybe, will confuse someone reading the wiki or punchball's document."

If I could go back and do things better, the fix would be to not have this situation be possible, rather than to have more to the lose-track rule. Ideally lose-track itself would also not be possible; probably many of the abilities that move cards could have fairly similar forms without invoking that rule.
If we hadn't done the second editions yet, possibly I would reword Band of Misfits, Overlord, and Inheritance.

You can easily avoid the problem irl by not playing with those cards, or some sort of house rule for this ubiquitous scenario.

59
Rules Questions / Re: Inheritance interaction
« on: July 19, 2018, 02:43:44 pm »
Just to try to make sense of this rules discussion, in the scenario described by trivialknot with BoM and Mining Village, does the BoM actually get played as Lighthouse when played the third time by the first King's Court?
Yes. The Band of Misfits is a Lighthouse currently, and you're playing it.

60
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Favorite Expansions in 2018
« on: July 19, 2018, 02:31:20 pm »
If you're playing by the official rules, there is no way to have Colony/Platinum in the game unless you have at least 1 Prosperity card in the Kingdom.
Quote from: The official rules
Prosperity includes two new base cards, Platinum and Colony. You can include them whenever you want to; they are always used together. If you want to determine when to use them randomly, choose a random Kingdom card being used, and if it is from Prosperity, use Platinum and Colony.

Woah, is this an update to the second edition? Did Dark Ages make the same change with regards to Shelters?

*Edit* No, the new Dark Ages rulebook still has the old rule. Donald, why did you update the rule for Prosperity, but not for Dark Ages?
The intention was to generate this question. Bam, success.

Any time there is a discrepancy, probably I would have preferred no discrepancy. Things happened at different times, something was thought of and something else missed, blah blah blah. There's never a story here and there isn't this time.

61
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: July 18, 2018, 11:00:49 pm »
Thank you. I was not sure whether Estate3 was "still" in play, since it hadn't moved since I had played it as the second time, which may cause Royal Carriage to be called.
It hasn't moved since Sally played it, but it has moved since you played it.

Sally could use a Royal Carriage on Estate3.

Now this has me wondering... if through a series of weird stuff like above; what if you re-played the Estate? Is it still the case that 's not "still in play" because it has left play and re-entered play?
If it left play and got replayed, it's not "still in play" from the first time you played it. However it's "still in play" from the 2nd time, and so you could Royal Carriage that, to do what that does.

If I'm not mistaken, isn't that the scenario majiponi is asking about to begin with?
Yes, if you weren't mistaken, that would be the scenario he was asking about. However, you're mistaken.

62
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: July 18, 2018, 03:29:35 pm »
Thank you. I was not sure whether Estate3 was "still" in play, since it hadn't moved since I had played it as the second time, which may cause Royal Carriage to be called.
It hasn't moved since Sally played it, but it has moved since you played it.

Sally could use a Royal Carriage on Estate3.

Now this has me wondering... if through a series of weird stuff like above; what if you re-played the Estate? Is it still the case that 's not "still in play" because it has left play and re-entered play?
If it left play and got replayed, it's not "still in play" from the first time you played it. However it's "still in play" from the 2nd time, and so you could Royal Carriage that, to do what that does.

63
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: July 18, 2018, 01:10:46 pm »
Thank you. I was not sure whether Estate3 was "still" in play, since it hadn't moved since I had played it as the second time, which may cause Royal Carriage to be called.
It hasn't moved since Sally played it, but it has moved since you played it.

Sally could use a Royal Carriage on Estate3.

64
Rules Questions / Re: "in play" on Royal Carriage
« on: July 18, 2018, 12:11:36 am »
Pretty sure this should be no, because of the “still”. If it has left play and re-entered play, it is not “still” in play.
Correct. You can only use Royal Carriage if the card has not left play; it's not enough for it to have returned to play.

65
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 17, 2018, 09:03:59 pm »
I've noticed you spectating several high-level league matches. What is it like watching people play your creation competitively, in general?

Is it amusing? Entertaining? Fulfilling?

Do you find validation of design choices by watching some of these matches?
To me, I'm just me; when I post on the forums it feels a lot to me like it does when I post on forums where I'm no-one special. Now shift that over to watching games being played. For the most part I don't think I'm specially affected. Sure there are things I can speak up on, oh in playtest that card was different. I'm aware that people might expect me to be a better player than I am, because I'm the guy. That's a bummer, who needs that pressure.

That said, I do like seeing interesting games, cool lines of play; I don't like seeing cards I blew it on make the game worse. It's fun to see cards I blew it on by making them too weak end up doing something. For a typical game I am not thinking "look at all my mistakes," but then the powerful cards gain some finesse from the high level of play in the matches I'm likely to click on, and taking out those 12 Dominion/Intrigue cards reduced the frequency of games with lots of duds. In that last championship there was a game with Pirate Ship, Counting House, and Noble Brigand, but there was a lot going on in the remaining cards.

Probably when an expansion is new I feel more like, this is my thing, please like it guys, I hope I didn't blow it. But later that pressure is off.

I'm probably overstating this due to wanting to feel like I'm not stuck-up or something; some cognitive bias, we can work out which one later. Probably I've to some degree watched games just because I'm the guy. Maybe in a sideways sense of, like, this isn't as much of a waste of time as it would be if it were some other game, because hey I'm the guy. Or the expected background idea of wanting to feel good about making a game that people are playing.

But then, I've watched a bunch of Super Mario Odyssey videos, and I'm clearly no-one there, just a guy who wants to see cool stuff in a game he likes.

Spectating Dominion is greatly enhanced by being able to chat with the other spectators. It's way more fun than watching the videos. I do watch some of the videos, but tend to skip a lot, trying to just see, how did they open, how did things develop, how did it end, without seeing every decision being considered. But when you're spectating, you can talk about the decisions, spot things they didn't, listen to Stef spot things they didn't, or you know, talk about something else even.

66
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 17, 2018, 08:38:25 pm »
A lot of Dominion's Attacks can actually help your opponent in certain circumstances. Do you have any particular tricks for making sure those Attacks remain balanced rather than ruining some kingdoms, being too swingy or whatever?
It's not some specific concern to focus on. We play games with the cards, if they're too strong or too weak I change them, unless they're early cards and I didn't know better, or later cards where I just blew it. It's fine by me if say draw-to-X is good against Militias. It's a problem if an attack is too often shut out; I try to avoid that.

67
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 17, 2018, 08:32:34 pm »
Why do you have the "everywhere" part on Bridge (formerly "including cards in players’ hands" in the 1st edition), but not on Highway, Princess, Bridge Troll, etc.?
At any given moment I had to word a card and had some idea as to what wording I liked best, and for Intrigue I put in that "everywhere." Possibly I was thinking "this is the first expansion, let's be a little friendlier," or "I am already saving words cutting out that other text, I have room for this word" or something.

68
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 14, 2018, 02:48:27 am »
Now I'm curious how artwork commissioning works. If an artist comes back with something clearly sucky or inappropriate, can it be rejected, or do they get paid regardless?
I'm not involved with payment, but think that they do get paid if they produce a finished piece which we don't use, which there have been a few of. We usually see sketches first meaning we've okay'd a sketch at that point. Sometimes there are things you can't tell from the sketch though. And sometimes like Jay insists on a piece being lighter, for example, and brightness was specified in advance so I bet they don't get paid extra for fixing it.

69
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: July 14, 2018, 02:43:01 am »
Have you ever had to choose different artwork or a different concept for a card due to it being printed in a certain country? I know China in particular will censor, like, human skeletons, which could have been a problem for something with Nocturne's theme.
In the prototype, the 4th expansion was called War. That wasn't an acceptable theme for Hans im Gluck, and it ended up Dark Ages.

City was called Boomtown, and I said, make sure it doesn't look wild-west-y, and Jay said, wait why is this called Boomtown.

70
Rules Questions / Re: "no other rule is a Dominion rule"
« on: July 13, 2018, 03:48:59 pm »
Does this also hold for denominations? For example, I play a Pawn and say I use it to get "+1 action, +1 purchase" instead of "+1 action, +1 buy". Humans will know what I mean, but is it technically correct? Similarly, the rules only say that the player with the most VP wins (or tied with fewer turns, or tied). Does that mean there is no 'official' second place?
These seem like things that you will need to find your own personal peace with; a mere game designer cannot help you sufficiently.

71
Rules Questions / Re: "no other rule is a Dominion rule"
« on: July 12, 2018, 02:44:18 pm »
In game contexts, you can only do things specifically allowed by the rules.

72
I am not a prescriptivist when it comes to language (at least not for free I'm not).

Someone made a meaningless correction to tenet vs tenant, Donald made a joke intentionally misusing "less" to showcase the triviality of it, and LastFootnote kept the joke going by talking about Diction.

I just ran with it!
If that was all supposed to be hilarious, I have bad news for you.

73
A special mention to the fact that, as of 2017, it's technically correct to use "they" and "their" to refer to a single person.
It's been "correct" for hundreds of years.

You just posted a big list of language prescriptivism garbage that I am utterly against. The language is what the people say; no-one gets to make up rules for it and have them be right. When people start saying "who" instead of "whom," it becomes correct, just like when they started saying "you" instead of "ye" and "thou."

Man. As usual, this belongs in RSP, no joke. Take it there.


THE WHOLE JOKE WAS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THINGS THAT DON'T MATTER!!!!!!
Take it to RSP, we try to keep poison out of the forums visible to guests.

74
A special mention to the fact that, as of 2017, it's technically correct to use "they" and "their" to refer to a single person.
It's been "correct" for hundreds of years.

You just posted a big list of language prescriptivism garbage that I am utterly against. The language is what the people say; no-one gets to make up rules for it and have them be right. When people start saying "who" instead of "whom," it becomes correct, just like when they started saying "you" instead of "ye" and "thou."

Man. As usual, this belongs in RSP, no joke. Take it there.

75
No new Base Cards set yet, by the way? Looking so forward to these two boxes, so that everything (except for a couple of promos) is updated.
New Base Cards is out, some people have it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 190

Page created in 0.108 seconds with 19 queries.