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 - Gubump

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50
1
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #140: Choose Three
« on: January 12, 2022, 07:28:17 pm »
Quote from: Cargo Ship

Cargo Ship
Action
Cost: $5

Choose Three:
Gain a card costing up to 2; +1 Card; +$1.
The choices may be the same.

Cargo Ship is a Smithy variant with significant piling power, money generation, and flexibility. It can be used in nearly all decks, and provides a good reason to hit 5 early. There are synergies with Capitalism, remodelers, and rush strategies.

Feedback is appreciated.

1. You're missing the symbol for the gain choice; "gain a card costing up to 2" doesn't make sense, but "gain a card costing up to " does.
2. The name Cargo Ship is already taken by an official card.

2
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #140: Choose Three
« on: January 10, 2022, 09:37:27 pm »


Am I misunderstanding something, because why would you ever choose anything besides +1 Action, +1 Buy, and +? Besides edge cases like Village Green.

3


I was trying to find out how to host images without Imgur and apparently you can host the images on Google Drive, with some effort. It's not very easy to figure out how to size the images and all of that. The suggestion to see what other people did by quoting them helped a lot.

Anyway, I wanted to try making a pseudo-traveler line, except it works in a chain of playing. It appears that this is a really interesting mechanic. It looks different. I know the text does not fit the theme for Farm well, but I don't know what else to put there.

Feedback is welcome and appreciated. I will be changing these sometime next week, for power level and other reasons, but I don't have time now.

I'm not seeing any images.

4
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #139: Highly Irregular
« on: January 03, 2022, 05:06:40 pm »


I think this needs to be a Reaction and say "...play this from your hand." See Sheepdog and Falconer.

5
Rules Questions / Re: Buying from an empty pile?
« on: January 01, 2022, 07:51:09 pm »
You are correct, the answer is no.

6
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #139: Highly Irregular
« on: December 31, 2021, 11:47:09 am »


Not sure whether it should cost 3 or 4.

I'd suggest using a different color for this. Using the same color as Actions makes it liable to be misread, since people expect colors to indicate the type(s) a card has. When I first saw this, I was like "wait, Actions don't qualify, why submit this?"

7
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #139: Highly Irregular
« on: December 30, 2021, 04:31:42 pm »
cards like Courtier aren't expecting zero types.

Why couldn't Courtier work with a card with zero types? If I discard no Victory cards with Shepherd, I get +0 Cards. Why would choose zero lead to undefined behavior?

8
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #138: A Revealing Contest
« on: December 28, 2021, 01:27:59 am »
25-Hour Notice

I'm not sure whether this is an oddly-specific amount of time for a warning or a typo.

9
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: ⭐Holiday Fan Card Contest: Round Robin⭐
« on: December 20, 2021, 07:45:57 am »
Question: Are States inherently limited to one per player at any given time?  E.g., if there's a card that says "Take [X] state", would it automatically fail if you already have the State, or could you take a 2nd copy of that State, assuming there's one available?

unclear. We've only got a couple states as-is, so canonwise there's not a ton to go off of. I think for simplicity's sake, having a default rule be "you can't stack multiple of the same state" is fine.

I'll point out that of the official states, you can only get Deluded/Envious "if you don't have Deluded or Envious.'

And the other two States also have something explicitly preventing you from taking multiple copies; Lost in the Woods is only taken if you aren't already the player with it, and even if Fool didn't have that wording, there's only one copy of it; and the Miserable/Twice Miserable state is only taken if you haven't already been affected by Misery.

10
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #137: From Whence It Came
« on: December 16, 2021, 10:21:04 pm »



11
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: New World
« on: December 12, 2021, 11:31:13 am »
I feel like Ball Game is a good candidate for the first multi-type landscape as a Law - Event, given that it's the only Law that can be purchased. I think multi-type laws in general could be interesting design space, for a sort of sequel, though I don't know how one would implement the existence of multiple law decks from different expansions.

The problem with multi-type landscapes is that the space landscapes have for types is so small that just two types makes the text really tiny.

12
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion Card Image Generator
« on: December 12, 2021, 04:11:33 am »
Recently, the generator has not been bolding the numbers in symbols. Here's an image with what the cost currently looks like:

And here's an image with what the cost should look like:

13
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: New World
« on: December 12, 2021, 02:25:10 am »
Is there a reason Totem doesn't have the Attack type?  Making it so that each other player has to pay $2 to enact a Law seems like an attack to me

Also, you said you can only have one Law at a time and that if you take a second Law you must discard one. So, am I understanding correctly then that when you play Totem and you have a Law, you would have to discard one of the two, then optionally play the one you're left with?

I asked him on Discord and he said he doesn't want Totem to be Moatable (I still think it should be an Attack, ftr). And your understanding (last sentence) is correct.

14
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #137: Return This
« on: December 10, 2021, 01:03:50 pm »
Equine Village
$4
Action
+1 Card and +1 Action.
Choose one: return this to the Supply for +2 Cards; or +1 Action.

I would reverse the order of those two options. First time I read it, I thought you also had to return it to the Supply for +1 Action.

Or even just "you may return this to the Supply for +2 Cards. If you don't, +1 Action."

15
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #136: ‘Tis the Season
« on: December 02, 2021, 11:27:04 am »
Lab is significantly better than Scheme, so Toy Train should probably provide a Horse.

Did you miss that you also get the +1 Card? It's Scheme + Lab for you, not just Scheme.

16
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #135: Go Big or Go Home
« on: November 26, 2021, 01:31:06 pm »
I think that card wordings should be simple and reflect how you actually play (I never considered the blue dog issue you referred to to be an actual issue). Nobody puts the card in their discard pile and the moves it onto their Exile mat, they directly put it there. So „Exile instead“ makes more sense than „ gain and then Exile“.

But it is a trivial difference as you rarely want the junk to be able to leave the Exile mat (what your „gain and Exile“ Version enables you to do). This brings us back to my initial point: with your version most folks would not even be aware that you could discard stuff from Exile because they would intuitively read the card, no matter how it is worded as „ah OK, I can directly put it on the mat“.

What matters is that the wording should be clearer because currently you can easily misread the card, as arowdok did, as „gain and Exile another copy from the Supply“.

Border Wall uses the same wording as Gatekeeper. And I haven't seen people get confused about Gatekeeper or complain about its wording.

Also, with your logic, Watchtower should say "to instead either trash that card or put it onto your deck" and Replace should say "if you would've gained an Action or Treasure, instead put it onto your deck."

17
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #135: Go Big or Go Home!
« on: November 24, 2021, 03:03:19 pm »
You might wanna word it as something like "Exile it instead".

Replacing the gaining instead of adding something to it opens up a new can of worms. Trader was changed to avoid that for a reason.

18
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #134: This is Worthless
« on: November 19, 2021, 12:13:43 am »

One of your images (the middle one that isn't visible) is just
Code: [Select]
http:// Rather than the full URL.

19
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #134: This is Worthless
« on: November 16, 2021, 11:23:49 am »
Quote
Census Office
$0 - Project
At the start of your turn, if you have at least 5 cards in hand, +2 Cards then discard four cards.
If at least 3 of the cards you discarded were either Actions or Gold, +1 VP.

I took this as a challenge to make a $0 cost Project.
A self-Margraver could be useful sometimes. Added the VP for a little incentive (or temptation) if you aren't sure.

Only the topmost discarded card is visible to your opponents, so this needs to say "discard four cards, revealed." See Silos and Shepherd.

20
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #133: A Time to Feast
« on: October 31, 2021, 08:32:08 pm »

21
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #133: A Time to Feast
« on: October 31, 2021, 12:58:38 pm »
Stonemason should be considered a Remodeler if Altar is imo.

Stonemason is borderline for me.  I figured I would allow it since it can increase your deck size unlike Altar (barring games with Fortress).

Would Develop qualify for the same reason, then?

22
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #133: A Time to Feast
« on: October 31, 2021, 12:45:46 pm »
Stonemason should be considered a Remodeler if Altar is imo.

23
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #132: All Hallow's Eve
« on: October 30, 2021, 10:52:48 pm »
Congratulations, Timinou!

Bummer that I didn't win, but I made Black Knight mostly for the "Night - Knight" meme, so I didn't set my hopes too high. :)

24
Rules Questions / Re: Counterfeit + Duration + Capitalism
« on: October 26, 2021, 02:18:44 am »
If I have Capitalism, and I use Counterfeit to play something like Merchant Ship twice, I know I'd get $4 this turn and $4 next turn, but does Counterfeit stay out the same way Throne Room or pre-2019 errata Procession would?

Pre-2019 errata Procession didn't stay in play when Processioning Durations. Counterfeit would not stay in play; per the Throne Room FAQ (on the wiki), if you Throne a Duration and that Duration somehow leaves play early (such as via Bonfire, or in this case immediately via being trashed by Counterfeit), the Throne gets discarded from play at the end of turn even if that Duration still has things left to do on future turns. This is true of all Thrones, not just Throne Room.

25
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #132: All Hallow's Eve
« on: October 25, 2021, 07:17:22 pm »


Would this be added to the standard Knight pile?

Yes, but you could also select 10 random Knights to use out of 11.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 50

Page created in 0.094 seconds with 19 queries.