76
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Interview with Donald X.
« on: August 16, 2023, 01:23:49 pm »Any news about a possible new expansion Donald X GOATnnarinoI expect a new expansion next year.
Any news about a possible new expansion Donald X GOATnnarinoI expect a new expansion next year.
I was playing some PlunderXCornucopia and had a thought:The premise wasn't that it was replacing Bag of Gold, but they're sure both uh cloth that you have in a shape that lets it hold treasure for you.
Is Sack of Loot just a stealth revision to Bag of Gold? http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=5799.msg368773#msg368773
Hello, any updates on the new promo card named Farm iirc?I have no update, for either the German version or English version.
Donald X, Is there any reason you haven't posted on the forum in a couple of months?Just a lack of things I felt I should respond to. I still check the forums every day. Most of the current online Dominion traffic is on the discord though, and the (currently down) reddit is a distant second.
Will it still cost $6?Yes, it's not a new card, it just has new name/art.
I'd swear there was a version that added copies with each turn. I don't have it in me to look through the discussions of the wordings though.I think Taskmaster is the first time we've seen the phrasing of "repeat this ability" on a Dominion card. Is there a reason it's not just "at the start of your next turn, play this again."?Yes. A lot of work went into that wording, trying to find something that handled all the cases that needed handling. "Play this again" was tried and failed; consider Throning it.
Hmm, what's the problem with Throning "at the start of your next turn, play this again"? If you gain a $5, it plays itself twice next turn, setting up its next-turn ability twice. If you gain a $5 that turn too, it plays itself twice again, etc. What am I missing?
I've played Dominion on-and-off for years, and there is just one tiny little thing that bothers me about the game.I'm there for you!
The Guilds flavor text description mentions specifically cheese graters cheesemaking, and cheese destruction, and yet there are no cheese or cheesemaker-themed cards in Guilds or any other set.
Shoemakers were also mentioned, and they finally got represented a few years later in Nocturne with the Cobbler card.
Will these long-hoped-for cheese-themed cards ever come to pass, in a forthcoming 2nd edition, as a promo or in a new set?
I think it would only brie a gouda thing.
Also, I love the prosperity 2nd edition update, thank you for making it.
As far as I can tell, Donate is the only Event that affects a future (non-extra) turn without any method to track it: Delay, Inheritance, etc have an Action card; Ferry, Pathfinding, etc have a token. Is this an intentional precedent, or just a side effect of the 2022 errata? Is tracking here simply not an issue because of the price? Did you ever try adding other Duration-type "next turn" Events?My mission was to preserve the original Donate as well as possible while having a wording that worked. That's how it got that wording. It tends to be very memorable; no worries about forgetting it so far.
I was thinking about the Ruins... It's a nice mechanics but used by only 3 cards... Could we see in a future some new use for them? In a Promo or in a new Expansion... I'm thinking to trying to make Cursers give Ruins instead! E.g. Witch: +2 cards, every other player gains a Ruins... Would it make the game unbalanced or "broken"?The problem with doing more with them is that you need those 50 cards. I don't think it will ever be worth it to have another expansion include them. You can imagine a "treasure chest" expansion, full of cards that add to other expansions, without including the extra components from those expansions; I don't know if RGG would go for that though. I mean the idea of the extra cards for other expansions would be fine; it's not including the needed components that's the problem.
P.S. I know designers don't comment on variants, it's just something that I'm willing to try and wish to know if it would make the game going to a direction not intended...
Play Harbor Village [1].Looks correct.
..Get +1 card and +2 Actions.
..Inspiring triggers: you may play a card you don't have a copy of in play. Decline to do so.
Play Harbor Village [2].
..Get +1 card and +2 Actions.
..Inspiring and Harbor Village [1] both trigger.
....Choose to resolve Inspiring first.
......Play Guildmaster
........Get +$3.
........Harbor Village [2] triggers.
..........Did Guildmaster give you +$? Yes it did. Therefore, Harbor Village [2] gives you +$1.
....Resolve Harbor Village [1] second.
......Did Harbor Village [2] give you +$? Yes it did. Therefore, Harbor Village [1] gives you +$1.
I mean. Which is friendlier: the friendliest answer, or the most accurate answer? I try to be friendly, but some people crave accuracy.
When the cards are already out, there has to be a rules problem; power level isn't enough.
Is King's Court + Masquerade an exception to this? Or did you consider that a rules problem?
Under what circumstances do you kill a combo?When a card isn't out yet, the issues are:
Have you ever tried reusing a Victory card mechanic, e.g. a version of gardens with a different cost and a different ratio of cards to points?I've tried just slightly different things.
Now that the trashing token is when-gain, I have this question: Let's say I put the token on Village, and then I gain a Village from trash, does the token trigger?You can certainly read it either way. Tentatively, Plan does trigger when you gain the card from the trash.
I think it should. It says "when you gain a card from that pile", but the other tokens are "when you play a card from that pile" and of course you play them from your hand (normally).
Enchantress is easier:This isn't true! I'm not saying that any of the rest of your post is true; time does not permit. I can tell you though that this part is not.
"When you would follow the instructions of a played Action card, it makes you instead get +1 Card and +1 Action."
What are your thoughts on Ruins? My hot take is that it's the least successful mechanic in Dominion history. Even for other mechanics that could be considered a "failed experiment" (artifacts, hexes, overpay etc.), there's at least 1-2 cards that I like; I can't say the same thing for Ruins. Also yikes, it eats up 50 cards in an expansion.Eating 50 cards is certainly a bummer. Aside from that, I still like the premise. Ruinses are more interesting than Curses. I could see it being Ruinses from the start, no Curses.
What are your thoughts on Silver Mine? It's been mocked a lot as a bad Sculptor.I remain happy to have done it. They can't all have a million words and require non-supply piles and do something no card has done that generates a dozen-page rules thread.
Now that some time has passed, what are your thoughts on the Loot pile in general? I think at this point, it's the least liked mechanic in Plunder?Well done Donald X., slam dunk, amazing mechanic. Go listen to Tom Vasel rave about it. Everything can't be aimed at expert players. Even in the 15th expansion, where it's more reasonable to aim things at experts.
Innovation has some tricky rules around it, and yet there have been a lot of those effects recently (especially in 2022). Is this a mix of "we're already a bunch of expansions in" and "it's fun and popular"?It's those things plus "what a great idea, why hadn't I done this years earlier." I mean I had it years earlier; it took until Innovation for it to stick.
What other wordings of Reckless were tried? I'd be most curious about finding a Flagship-like wording (with some parenthetical that stops infinite loops).I can share all the printed wordings; it's too much work to look up all considered wordings.
You've said that Rich is your least favorite thing in Plunder. When you were making the set, did you worry that the gameplay may resemble what you dislike about Lucky Coin?Well, I didn't worry about that enough, or it wouldn't be in the set, but sure, that's basically the issue. Sometimes Rich is on a card you already wanted, and then you end up not getting to have as much fun with the board, at least unless your opponent cooperates with you (which the bot does not).
In your opinion, what expansion is the closest to "perfect"? (if this question is too hard to answer, just say Prosperity 2E)Oops, missed this question.
Originally I was thinking, "oh right, thx, Throne Rooms should behave like Band of Misfits, staying out when cards aren't in play, for consistency and a simpler rule and Whatnot."I don't understand the question. Flagship is both a Command card and a Duration card.Quote from: Donald X.So I am leaning towards, the BoM rule is in fact only for BoM's, and Procession a BoM a Duration does not keep Procession out.
I guess you still mean that the rule also applies to scenarios like in this thread (Flagship + BoM + Duration)?
I was referring to the question in the OP of this thread. Is the ruling that Flagship stays in play? (Flagship is a TR; it's not a BoM, i.e. a card that says to play a card leaving it there.)
The Empire's Landscapes they are like endgame modifiers... You have the normal game and bam... a Landscape "alters" they way scores are tallied at the end.No; the entire idea to Allies was to have lots of different kinds of tokens, where the Ally tells you what the tokens do this game.
The Allies' Allies were they at one point intended to be something like "start game" modifiers?
I don't understand the question. Flagship is both a Command card and a Duration card.Quote from: Donald X.So I am leaning towards, the BoM rule is in fact only for BoM's, and Procession a BoM a Duration does not keep Procession out.
I guess you still mean that the rule also applies to scenarios like in this thread (Flagship + BoM + Duration)?
Donald X.,I guess I have ruled both ways on this.
Is the ruling
a card that plays a card stays in play as long as that card would have stayed in play; or
a card that plays a card that is not in play stays in play as long as that card would have stayed in play?
In other words, if you Procession a BoM to play a Duration, does the Procession stay?
No. Enchantress's +1 Card +1 Action doesn't become the card's instructions. It's not a thing Chameleon looks at. Enchantress gives cantrip instead of FTI; Chameleon changes FTI.Chameleon + Enchantress: Yes, Reckless and Enchantress both look for FTI happening due to playing a card. If one sees the Chameleon FTI then they both do. I'm with you on this one. The Menagerie rulebook says that you can use a Way to dodge Enchantress. So the temptation is to reverse the Reckless ruling to match the rulebook there. Possibly though I reverse the rulebook ruling instead. The question then is which seems like it will make more sense to people.
So to double check, the reversed-rulebook ruling would go like this?
Your Chapel is Enchanted:
-use Chameleon: get +$1 +1 Action
-don't use Chameleon: get +1 Card +1 Action
If so, I give my thumbs up to that.
But doesn't call out Chameleon specifically. Chameleon could be the exception, even though it's not brought up in the rulebook.That's true, and there's a nice line of reasoning that makes e.g. Way of the Sheep dodge Enchantress but not Way of the Chameleon.