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 - LibraryAdventurer

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72
1751
Okay, I wanted to test out some more fan-made cards, but I just realized that I made significant changes to one of them before playing with it (and it probably still needs a tweak).  So I'm not sure if that would count as positive feedback or just 'here's my version of this card'.  The other card I played two games with I liked, but the people I played with didn't, and even I liked it less after playing with it than before.  So maybe I'll pass on the feedback for those particular cards and go on to test a couple others...

1752
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Revised versions of published cards
« on: January 08, 2014, 12:08:54 am »
Suggestion for another card:
Quote
Transmute
$1p - Action
Trash a card from your hand.  If it is an…  Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5; Treasure card, gain a transmute; Victory card, gain a Gold. | If you trashed a treasure and have a second transmute in your hand, you may reveal it.  If you do, you may gain any action card costing up to $5 or $2p instead of another transmute.
Alternatively, I might use this without the potion cost as cost $3 or $4.

Edit: Wow, I didn't realize how wordy that was at first.  Maybe this instead:
Quote
Transmute
$1p - Action
Trash a card from your hand.  If it is an…  Action card, gain a victory card costing up to $5; Treasure card, gain an action card costing up to 4 or 1p; Victory card, gain a Gold.

1753
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cave - secret vp card
« on: January 07, 2014, 06:50:08 pm »
Just add this: "For purposes of this card, $? = $1." (or $2)
My treasure version should still maybe cost $6 since it isn't hard to get it worth the same as a duchy, plus it can help your deck.
(Edited my previous post to change the cost.)

1754
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cave - secret vp card
« on: January 07, 2014, 06:28:26 pm »
How about this:
Quote
Cave
Action - Victory  $6

Place a card from your hand face down on the cave mat.
Worth 1vp for every $4 worth of treasure cards on your cave mat.
--
At the end of the game count the worth of the treasure cards on your cave mat (not cost), then return all of the cards on the mat to your deck.
It's still useful for getting victory cards out of your deck, but victory cards don't add to its score.  Getting rid of 4 coppers only gets you 1 point per cave, so you have to sacrifice better treasure cards to get a good score with the caves.  Buying one near the end of the game would be no good, but getting just one near the beginning would still be worthwhile. 4 coppers and 4 silvers makes it worth 3 VP. It wouldn't be hard to do that in the course of the game with one cave, but to get it significantly better you'd have to sacrifice better treasure cards.  Buying more copper to put in the cave would be too slow.
This fits the 'cave' theme well too.

1755
Who's the author of Storyteller?  I don't think it was ever revealed in this thread or else I missed it.  I'm adding it to my list of fan-made cards that I want to playtest at some point and I make a note of the author of each card in the list.

1756
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Revised versions of published cards
« on: January 06, 2014, 11:23:24 pm »
Quote
Harvest
$5 - Treasure

Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in.  +$1 per differently named card revealed.
Why didn't they make Harvest as a treasure card in the first place?

While not strictly better than Gold, that will usually be a Treasure worth at least $3 for $5.

If I were to try to fix Harvest, I'd do this:

Quote
Harvest
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put one of them back and discard the rest. +$1 per differently named card revealed.

Yeah, I guess my suggestion doesn't work.  Yours would work better, but I still think it should be a treasure card.  I guess I could just make it like this:
Quote
Harvest
$5 - Treasure

Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in.  If all revealed cards are differently named then this is worth $4, otherwise this is worth $2.

1757
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Cave - secret vp card
« on: January 06, 2014, 01:17:48 am »
I like the idea and might test it out at some point.


(I always thought using the #vpon command on Goko was kindof cheating.)

1758
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Revised versions of published cards
« on: January 06, 2014, 01:13:11 am »
Quote
Harvest
$5 - Treasure

Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put them back in the order they were in.  +$1 per differently named card revealed.

Why didn't they make Harvest as a treasure card in the first place?

1759
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko > Iso
« on: January 05, 2014, 03:04:38 am »
Just tried out that Japanese site.  I like how on the card list, you can view the card art enlarged so you can see the detail better.
BTW, I lost to someone who was making good use of scouts.

1760
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: A New VP Token Idea
« on: January 05, 2014, 02:38:53 am »
This seems a little related to Great Hall in that VP tokens are kinda like Great Halls...
VP tokens are very different from Great Halls IMO, especially in games with any cards like Ironworks, Ironmonger, Tribute, Peddler, or even Conspiritor.  Great Halls can be trashed by attacks or remodeled into duchies.  VP tokens significantly change the original concept of the game.

Anyway, I kinda like Davio's card idea. (I like it better than most other fan-made token-using cards I've seen.)  It might be a good idea to disallow putting it on copper.  I'm imagining someone using gardens or goons while ministering coppers and stocking up on +buy cards.

1761
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Card Workshop: The Copper Junker Attack
« on: January 03, 2014, 01:24:13 am »
Quote
Jinxed Knave
Types: Action - Attack - Reaction
Cost: $4
+$1. Each other player reveals the top card of his deck. If it's not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.
When any other player plays an attack card, you may discard this.  If you do, gain a conscripts, putting it into your hand.

A little more seriously, how about this:
Quote
Putpocket
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
Reveal the top card of your deck. If it's a copper, you may put it into your hand or trash it.  Otherwise, you may discard the revealed card or put it back.
Each other player reveals the top card of his deck. If it's not Copper, he gains a Copper, putting it on top of his deck.

1762
I really like Research except for that flaw about multiplying and colliding researches that dghunter pointed out.  (Kindof similar to the difficulty using the Forge which I tried out recently for the first time.)  Maybe it could be tweaked to allow a conversion like this:

Quote
Research
Types: Action
Cost: $1P
Trash 2 cards from your hand. Gain a card costing exactly $2 or $1P more than the total cost of the trashed cards in coins. You may ignore any potion in the cost of the trashed cards when choosing a card to gain.

When you gain this, gain an Action costing up to $4.
This way you could get something useful out of colliding Research cards (or turn a familiar into a non-potion cost card after the curses run out).

...This fun scenario just popped into my head:
Play a familar (giving out the last curse), then play a research, trashing your other familiar and a copper to gain a peddler.

I like the incantation too.  Not only trashing a copper to get a silver or a silver to get a gold, but also to trash those action cards that are useful early game and not as useful later on (chapel, moneylender, bureaucrat).
And it could also probably be improved with a small tweak "...If you do, reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a card that costs at least as much as it and shares a type with it. Put it into your hand and discard the rest."
Then you couldn't count on getting a silver to replace a trashed copper, but getting a copper to replace your trashed copper is still good.


1763
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Create game does not work
« on: December 28, 2013, 11:01:25 pm »
Is there an update of Salvager that includes this?

1764
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Anagrams
« on: December 28, 2013, 03:38:45 am »
deliver a runt barry
a bed return rivalry
a berry lurid tavern
narrate blurry dive
  And one that goes with the movie I just saw this evening:
an barrel river duty

PS: The name Drab Emordnilap would be a lot cooler if it was actually a palindrome.
 Drabemord Nilapal Indro Mebard?

1765
My comments on a few cards:

Quote
Dancer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card. Take a Coin token. You may pay any number of Coin tokens. For each token you paid, +1 Action.

When you gain this, take a Coin token.
I like it at $3 cost.  Wouldn't work well as an only village in an engine, but I think it'd work great in a BM+ deck or with other village cards where you could use it as a village sometimes or use it to collect coin tokens other times.  I don't think it's supposed to be used as a cantrip most of the time.

Quote
Royal Guard
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: $3
+1 Action. Choose one: Take a Coin token; or pay any number of Coin tokens and +$2 per token paid.

When any player (including you) plays an Attack card, you may discard this from your hand. If you do, take 2 Coin tokens.
I think like it.  But I think it'd be underpowered if there were no attack cards or other coin token cards in the kingdom, and it'd be hard to strengthen it without making it overpowered with attack cards.

Quote
Councilman
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $8–
+1 Card. +1 Action. Each other player pays a Coin token. If nobody did, +1 Card and +1 Buy.

You may underpay for this card. For each $1 you underpaid, each other player takes a Coin token.
I like the idea (including the underpay), but I don't think it works well as-is because of what eHalcyon said.  Also, I'm not sure if it means each other player gives you a coin token or returns a coin token to the suppy.  I'd like it better if they give you the coin tokens.

Quote
Jeweler
Types: Action
Cost: $3+
Take a Coin token. Name a card. Each other player reveals his hand. If the named card is reveald, take a Coin token.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. Take a Coin token per $2 you overpaid (rounded down).
I think overpay for coin tokens might work if it's 2 for 1 like this, but I don't like the top.

Quote
Pawnbroker
Types: Action
Cost: $3+
Take a Coin token. You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, take a Coin token per $2 in its cost, rounded down.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, the player to your left chooses a card in the Supply costing exactly $2 more than the amount you overpaid. Gain it.
I kinda like the top.  As for the overpay effect, I don't like the idea of someone else choosing the card you gain, but then it would work nicely if you paid $9 for the pawnbroker (as long as there's no peddlers).

Quote
Porter
Types: Action
Cost: $2+
+1 Card. +1 Action. You may put any number of cards from your hand on top of your deck.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $1 you overpaid, set aside the top card of your deck, putting it into your hand at the start of your next turn.
The top seems a little weak, and the overpay effect seems a little overpowered.  Maybe it balances out.  I'm inclined to like it, but I want to playtest it to see how well it works. I'll vote for it in the first round anyway.

Quote
Tiller
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. Reveal the top card of your deck. You may pay a Coin token. If you do, put the card into yoru hand. Otherwise discard it and take a Coin token.
As-is, I might be good at $2.  But I would suggest removing the 'pay a coin token' part and just say "You may put the card into your hand. Otherwise discard it and take a coin token."  Then I'd like it better and it might be good at $3.

Quote
Demagogue
Types: Action
Cost: $4+
You may discard a Treasure. If you do, +2 Cards and +2 Actions.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. Each other player reveals 2 cards from his deck per $1 you overpaid, puts the revealed Coppers back, and discards the rest.
I think the overpay effect would work better either on a cheaper card or as part of the top (probably revealing 3 cards).  Also, I think it'd work better if the attack was "discard all revealed cards costing more than $2 and put the rest back.  I'd suggest moving the attack to the top and making it cost $5. Of course then it doesn't fit well in guilds, but I think it'd be a better card.

Quote
Bookkeeper
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card. +1 Action. At the start of your Buy phase, you may pay $2. If you do, take a Coin token.
Would be good for when you have lots of coin but no +Buy. Otherwise, not very useful.  Would probably work at $2 cost.

Quote
Housekeeper
Types: Action
Cost: $2+
Trash a card from your hand. Take a Coin token.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, at the start of Clean-up, trash a card from your hand or from play per $1 you overpaid.
hmmm, trashing card(s) from play at the end of a turn is nice.  I think Mint may be the only official card that does that (and it does it very differently).  This should probably say "you may trash a card..." in the overpay effect.  nice and simple, I like it.

Quote
Sculptor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. You may discard 2 cards. If you do, name 2 cards and reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. For each revealed card you named, take a Coin token and put that card on your deck. Discard the rest.
Interesting. I like it, but I think it'd be better at $4 cost.

Quote
Tavern
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Action. +$2. Trash a card from your hand. Pay a Coin token. If you have no Coin tokens, gain a Curse. If you gained a Curse, take 3 Coin tokens.
It needs rewording as eHalcyon said.  I like the tradeoff of the effect when you have no coin tokens, but I don't like that it makes you pay a coin token in exchange for nothing.  But then it gives you a total of +5 buying power if you don't have coin tokens, so maybe it's worth it.

Quote
Potter
Types: Action
Cost: $4+
Take 2 Coin tokens. You may pay up to 5 Coin tokens. For each Coin token you paid beyond the first, gain a card costing up to $4.

When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you do, take a Coin token, then play this.
I kindof like the top, but the overpay effect is overpowered.

Other cards I like that I don't have much to say about: Taskmaster, Barber, Builder.
Cards I kindof like but probably not enough to vote for: Pawnbroker, Councilman, Demagogue, Town Hall, Bookkeeper, Bribe, Tavern, Potter (I only like it without the overpay effect).

1766
So after looking at the contests that have been going on, I added a bunch of fan-made cards to a list of cards I plan to use with proxies a lot of times when I play.  I thought I'd give some testing feedback to the authors of the cards.  So in the past couple days, I played three games using the cards Investment (by LastFootnote) and Voyage (by markusin).  I ended up modding both of the cards from their original forms in ways that I think makes an improvement.

Investment: The first game I played with just myself using three characters (I choose a strategy and a little personality for each player and play in-character).  The investment card was a dead card the first couple times it was drawn because it was either drawn as the only action in a hand, or just drawn without an action I wanted to invest.  So, when I played with two real players in the second two games, I added a +$1 at the top, so it would do something on the turn that you play it (even if you play it without another action in hand).  I think that was the only tweak I made:

Investment
$5 cost  Action
+1$. You may choose an Action card from your hand. Set aside this and the chosen card (face up). Return them to your deck at end of game. When you play an Action card, +$1 per copy of it you have invested.

It worked very well in the two games we played with it, fun and useful but not overpowered.  Of course, it works best with a cheap cantrip (or village), like wishing well.  In the game I invested in wishing wells, pawns were the only source of +Buy on the board, but I had a couple big turns playing 3 or 4 wishing wells and then a pawn.  Anyway, we liked the card.

Voyage: There was originally a weird part at the bottom of the card which would run out the pile of Voyages really fast.  I knew I wouldn't like that part, so I dropped it. Then, in the first game with myself, it was slightly disappointing with the same problem investment had at first -that it usually didn't do anything on the turn it was played, even though it was nice for the next turn.  So here's the version we used in the second two games:

Voyage
$5 cost  Action-Duration
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 3 costing from $3 to $6. Put those cards on top of your deck in any order. You may put one revealed card costing less than $3 into your hand. Discard the rest. At the start of your next turn, +2 Cards.

It seems a minor change to allow the player to keep one of the revealed cheap cards in hand and it makes the card do something helpful for the turn it's played (even when you don't have extra actions to draw the cards you just put on top).  This also worked well in the games we played.
Both cards were put to good use.

So... I was thinking about continuing to do this kind of post when I play with cards designed by the community here.  Is posting this feedback helpful?  Do you think anyone might be offended when I make tweaks to their card when I use it?

1767
Game Reports / fun win against a Gardener
« on: December 16, 2013, 09:34:30 pm »
Don't think it quite qualifies as epic, but this was a fun win.  I got a witch just before I realized my opponent was going for a Workshop-Gardens strategy (which he went all-out till the end).  So I played the witch sparingly and other times dicarded it with my cellars, trying to get a few quick provinces, and it totally worked.
He lost by two points when he had two curses and "curses!" was his final comment :)

http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20131216/log.516e0e73e4b082c74d7d10c1.1387246630625.txt
kingdom cards: Cellar, Chancellor, Woodcutter, Workshop, Feast, Gardens, Laboratory, Market, Witch, Adventurer


1768
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Revised versions of published cards
« on: December 15, 2013, 05:21:27 pm »
Lookout
Action
Cost $3
Look at top 3 deck cards, discard one, topdeck one, and either discard, topdeck, or trash the third. If you trash a card, +1 action.

(This is my casual wording. I guess you probablly wouldn't use the verb "topdeck" in an official wording, but this makes it shorter.)

1769
Goko Dominion Online / Re: F.DS room on (public) Goko - Outpost?
« on: December 13, 2013, 04:06:35 am »
I didn't realize until seeing this thread that there are rooms below the laboratory on the list.  In my experience, other players on Goko beat me most of the time, so maybe the Outpost wouldn't be the place for me to look for games anyway.  Would be really nice to have rooms separated by skill level though.

1770
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Donald X on Rebuild
« on: December 12, 2013, 12:52:51 am »
Fixing Rebuild could involve making it less powerful, but it could also involve making it more interesting. You'll notice from the histories that he tends to redesign rather than rebalance.

Rebuild, by rights, should be an interesting cards, but it was solved. Tinkering with cost or action may address the undue influence it has on the game, but it doesn't impact that the card itself is solved. I think the proper way to fix Rebuild is to make it less trivial to play it correctly.

LastFootnote's point is a good one: As long as all your $5-hands have to go to Duchies and not $5-actions, your deck will be boring. Making Rebuild itself cost $6 or $3P doesn't address this problem. I'm not sure that return-to-supply fixes this either.

I think the only way to fix this issue is to let Rebuild "skip" Duchy somehow in the progression from Estate to Province. Like, I dunno, by using some sort of token or mat to less you "store up" plays of Rebuild, and then two plays of Rebuild could take one Estate directly to a Province. Or something.
Interesting idea.  Here's an easy way you could avoid using a token or mat:

Rebuild  cost $6  action  (It probably should still cost 6 with this change...)
+1 action
Choose one:
-Trash a victory card and gain an action or treasure costing up to $3 more than the trashed card.
- or Trash an action or treasure and gain a victory card costing up to $3 more than the trashed card.

Or... One of Rebuild's biggest strengths is that it lets you look through your deck for a card to rebuild.  You could simply remove that ability and have to have something in your hand to rebuild.  That's more nerfing the card than making it more interesting though.

Re: potion costs: To me potions costs are more thematic than just making it less easily accessable.  Familiars, golems, etc are magical things, so you need something more than ordinary treasure to get them.  I don't think it would fit with rebuild.

1771
Help! / Re: I suck (Goons game)
« on: December 11, 2013, 03:02:43 pm »
Thanks all.  It looks to me like my main mistakes were:
- Thinking that buying coppers with goons was a good use of goons.
- Thinking that I needed to have some green in my deck to supplement the VP from goons (when it wasn't even the end of the game), and therefore needed the silver and gold to buy green.
Also, I thought topdecking goons with scheme would be a good way to play my goons more often.

PS: @Polk5440, you were looking at my opponents deck.  I didn't have any smithies.
I have a probably-unhealthy aversion to smithies since it seems like half the time you get a smithy as the only action in your hand and then draw your villages dead.  Getting one smithy would probably have been good for me.

1772
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Donald X on Rebuild
« on: December 11, 2013, 03:05:27 am »
I just houseruled Rebuild to cost $6, and I think it works better.  It's still good, but it's harder to build your whole strategy around the one card that way.

1773
Help! / I suck (Goons game)
« on: December 11, 2013, 12:56:40 am »
I mentioned elsewhere on the forum that I suck, so people suggested I post here so maybe people can help me get better.

Here's the game I just finished:
http://dom.retrobox.eu/?/20131210/log.50ce7267e4b0e91495e0f8a2.1386740577931.txt

Kingdom cards: Embargo, Menagerie, Scheme, Village, Fortress, Remodel, Smithy, Explorer, Mine, Goons.
Not sure what else to say about it except I'm not sure how I could've done better.  Seems like I got a lot of bad shuffle luck to me.

1774
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko ranking
« on: December 10, 2013, 07:30:14 pm »
I don't normally save the gamelogs.  I guess that would be the first step.
I also prefer playing casual games*, so I guess the leaderboard isn't going to matter much to me anyway.
I am also a little better than I was when I started playing on Goko, but it's hard to raise my rating.

*Partly because people who play pro generally tend to be better than casual players, and partly because I like to be able to make sure none of the few cards I really hate are in the game.

1775
Goko Dominion Online / Re: Goko ranking
« on: December 10, 2013, 01:33:27 am »
Here is a leaderboard based on Trueskill, like iso:

http://gokologs.drunkensailor.org/leaderboard

There are other nifty things like logsearch, you can see the links at the top of the page.

I just looked at this leaderboard for the first time, but I'm confused because I've played in the last month and definitely have more than 20 games, but I'm not on there at all.  Does it only count pro games?  I might not have 20 pro games yet.

EDIT: I've gotten my answer to this question from another thread (even just the name of the thread).  I might help to look before I ask...

Just as well, if I was on there, I'd be very near the bottom anyway.  I just kinda hoped maybe that leaderboard would rate me higher than Goko does...
I love this game, but I suck compared to most of the people on Goko.

Pages: 1 ... 69 70 [71] 72

Page created in 0.061 seconds with 19 queries.