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 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 62
1151
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 13, 2019, 11:37:28 am »
Gold Rush
Action/Duration - $6
For the rest of the game, at the start of your turn you may exchange a Gold for 2 Silvers, and a Silver for an Action card. Put any cards gained this way into your hand.

A couple wording notes... I assume that you mean to exchange a Gold from your hand, but this needs to be specified; official cards that refer to exchanging are already referring to a specific copy of a specific card; not just "a" card. Also, exchanging doesn't cause you to gain, so the last sentence doesn't work as you want. Perhaps...

"For the rest of the game, at the start of your turn you may trash a Gold from your hand, to gain a Silver and an Action card to your hand."

I think this has mostly the same functionality; except without the ability to gain 2 Silvers instead of a Silver and an Action... but how often would you choose the 2 Silvers option?

As Gold Rush is worded currently, there also aren't any cards gained this way. Exchanging doesn't "gain" anything, according to the rules.

1152
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 03, 2019, 04:31:41 am »
How would the "put it on the bottom" cards work with Scheme?

I would imagine that, as the wording currently is, since both effects have the same trigger, you get to choose which effect happens first. Since both effects involve moving the card, the other effect then loses track. Therefore, Scheme can still work (except on Maid, because its trigger is different).

If Gubump wants them to not work with Scheme, then the wording should be "when you would discard this from play". I don't know what the intention is, though.

Your understanding is correct.

1153
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #28: New card type
« on: May 02, 2019, 08:25:21 pm »
New card type: Queue

The entirety of each player’s Queue pile is face down except for the topmost card, and you can only look at the topmost card of a given queue pile. During the appropriate phase, you may play the top card of your Queue pile (this costs an Action during your Action phase). Unless stated otherwise, cards played this way are discarded as normal at end of turn. Each player starts with a Borough, Royal Library, and Marketplace shuffled into their Queue piles.

You only use the Queue pile mechanic when at least one card in the Kingdom has the Queue type.

The "base" Queue cards:



Some Kingdom Queue cards:


1154
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 30, 2019, 10:03:08 pm »


Do you have to get in last place to have "lost the last game this series," or is losing just not getting first?

Correct, losing is not getting first. So in a 3 player game, the players who got 2nd and 3rd place would get the reduced price on Escort the next game. If all players tied then nobody would get the reduced price the next game. If Escort is chosen to be in the first game of the series, then technically no players lost the last game as there was no last game and thus no reduced price for anyone.

I'm not quite happy with that last bit, but it would be tedious to add extra text just to address it. Thanks for the question!

I think that it would be clearer if it said "if you did not win the last game this series" instead (also, just grammatically, it should say "this costs 1 debt less" rather than "this cost 1 debt less").

1155
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 30, 2019, 09:25:20 pm »


Do you have to get in last place to have "lost the last game this series," or is losing just not getting first?

1156
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 29, 2019, 06:44:57 pm »
Megachurch does not specify from where the Megachurch is supposed to come. Gain to hand?

"When you trash a card without using a Megachurch, put it into your hand." "It" refers to the card you trashed.

1157
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #27: $1-cost card
« on: April 20, 2019, 03:49:57 pm »

1158
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 10, 2019, 01:35:56 pm »


I thought it was too strong for $4 but too weak for $5, so I added the drawback to make it more balanced.

1159
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 08, 2019, 12:30:54 am »
Quote
Mad Scientist
$5 Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may trash a card from your hand costing at least $2. If you do, +2 Cards. Otherwise, gain a Silver.
...Yes, it should say from your hand. Forgot to include that.
Also, what happened to the card image?
Uh... nothing. It's still in my post. just thought It'd be nicer to take less space by not including it in the nested quotes.

There's no image on my screen when I look at your post.

1160
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 07, 2019, 06:57:54 pm »
Quote
Mad Scientist
$5 Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may trash a card costing at least $2. If you do, +2 Cards. Otherwise, gain a Silver.
Trash a card... from where? Your hand, I assume?
Yes, it should say from your hand. Forgot to include that.

Also, what happened to the image?

1161
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 07, 2019, 05:37:49 pm »


Quote
Mad Scientist
$5 Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may trash a card costing at least $2. If you do, +2 Cards. Otherwise, gain a Silver.

Trash a card... from where? Your hand, I assume?

1162
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 07, 2019, 04:45:07 pm »


It's a budget Smithy.  It will be great if you can keep the silvers out of the way. Hopefully not too good.

This card is... incredibly weak. As the Fan Card Creation Guide says, the difference between $3 and $4 is negligible, so this card is far too weak to only cost $1 more than Smithy, with both an on-play and an on-gain drawback. Heck, I'd give it +4 Cards instead of 3 and price it the same.

It doesn't have an on-gain drawback, it has an on-gain attack.

Wouldn't players WANT to gain Silvers onto their deck? It's only an attack if other players are going for Silver Workers.

1163
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 07, 2019, 11:52:44 am »


It's a budget Smithy.  It will be great if you can keep the silvers out of the way. Hopefully not too good.

This card is... incredibly weak. As the Fan Card Creation Guide says, the difference between $3 and $4 is negligible, so this card is far too weak to only cost $1 more than Smithy, with both an on-play and an on-gain drawback. Heck, I'd give it +4 Cards instead of 3 and price it the same.

1164
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: April 05, 2019, 12:33:26 pm »


Not a very good name, possibly too weak.

I think Harbor might be a good name for this one. Its power level seems fine to me, although you could add a setup rule that causes a number of Silvers equal to the player count to start in the trash just to speed it up a little.

1165
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #25: Involve Silvers
« on: April 05, 2019, 02:29:44 am »

1166
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: March 25, 2019, 05:11:36 pm »


Quote
Cozener
Action - $3
--
+1 Buy
+$1

-
While this is in play, when you buy a Curse, gain a card costing up to $5.

"Cozener" is another word for Swindler; the idea here is that the Cozener sabotages a pricier item, then claims to be able to take the cursed object off the owners hands. Honestly, I couldn't think of a better word. Anyway, it's a somewhat different idea at the very least.

Cozener rewards players for gaining curses, it doesn't cause players to gain curses, and the prompt was the latter. I don't think this qualifies.

1167
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #23: Gains Curses
« on: March 20, 2019, 12:11:31 pm »


The last clause is there to prevent Blackmailer from becoming OP when the Curses run out.

The last clause isn't necessary, though could be nice to have as an italics/parenthesized reminder. By regular Dominion rules, you can always choose an option that isn't possible; see Torturer after Curses have run out, or with an empty hand.

This card seems weak. It's a weaker version of Jester, and it costs less, but it seems way weaker. Any time this hits Copper, a Victory card, or any other Junk; it is just a terminal Silver with no other benefit, which is worse than a card. You can't stack it to give out multiple Curses, because of the top-decked Curse. But I think it will rarely give out Curses; unless your opponent already has a strong engine that can plow through Curses, they won't choose that option, and instead the card will mostly read "+. You may gain a copy of the top card of your opponent's deck." If you consider gaining a card very similar to your opponent trashing that same card; then this is almost a strictly weaker version of Swindler.

Do you think that bumping up its cost to $5 but making it non-terminal would balance it?

1168
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #23: Gains Curses
« on: March 19, 2019, 11:44:16 pm »


The last clause is there to prevent Blackmailer from becoming OP when the Curses run out.

1169
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #20: Unique type combination
« on: February 24, 2019, 10:59:51 pm »


I think this might be a bit overpowered for ... Transmogrify costs and has a similar call effect minus the reaction, but also the call effect is less powerful and less flexible. It might work at , though.

Transmogrify gains to hand. Reconstruct doesn't.

1170
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Contest #20: Unique type combination
« on: February 24, 2019, 02:35:33 pm »

1171
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: February 23, 2019, 06:10:27 pm »
Where is the Night/Reserve?
Guardian, Ghost Town, Ghost, Cobbler, Crypt, Den of Sin, Raider

Those are Night/Duration, not Night/Reserve.

1172
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: February 22, 2019, 05:25:25 pm »
Iron Throne by segura
Selecting one blind card rather than any card from your hand weakens Iron Throne way too much for allowing multiple types to make up for it. I don't even think this is as strong as Vassal.
Yeah, it is probably Tribute-level weakish and could get away with costing $4. But the claim that is weaker than Vassal is highy dubious.
Let's be conservative and pick two weak cards on top; with a better card on top Iron Throne would become better relative to Vassal.

                           Vassal                             Iron Throne
Silver on top           +$2                               +$4
Pearl Diver on top    +1 Card +1 Action +$2      +2 Cards +2 Actions

Iron Throne is better in every instance (although there are of course situations in which you prefer a Conspirator over a Lost City).

The only situation in which Vassal is better is with green on top.

I was thinking about it only allowing Actions for some reason (I blame being sick). It's definitely stronger than Vassal as it is currently.

1173
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: February 22, 2019, 02:19:21 pm »
Commission by Fragasnap
Assuming my math is correct, the first Commission only discards one card, which makes Commission just a Lab minus, which makes Commission just a Lab minus in any set that doesn't contain Villages or Villagers. In other sets, however, it's kind of a Fugitive with a bonus, which bumps it up to just strong enough to cost $5. Good job on this one.

Royal Hall by MattLee
Unfortunately for you, it seems like everybody and their grandmother has come up with something almost identical to this.

Royal Heirloom by LibraryAdventurer
This is an interesting take on the "now and next turn" concept. I think it's too weak for $5, though.

Vestibule by Asper
Every other time you play it, it's a better Band of Misfits, but the rest of the time, it's a Throne Room. BoM is one of my favorite cards from Dark Ages, and Throne Room is one of my favorite cards from the base set, so I love this! Fantastic job as usual, Asper.

Collector by King Leon
Holy guacamole, this card is powerful. I think it would be worth $5 even if you limited it to just Action cards; being able to use Night and Treasure cards as well is broken.

Antechamber by Faust
The problem with making a minus version of a card that costs $4 or less is that the gap between $2 to $3, $3 to $4, and even $2 to $4 is actually pretty small power-wise. So as a result the minus card become either too close to the original to bother existing, or it becomes so much weaker that it's brokenly weak. This card is the latter.

Thane by Aquila
This is effectively a Throne Room that can search your discard pile as well as your hand, which is too strong compared to Throne Room to just cost $1 more. You don't even need to have an Action card in your hand to be able to use Thane effectively!

Parade by scott_pilgrim
In most cases, draw up to 6 will be worse than +2 cards, since it's generally easier to have a large handsize than it is to have a small handsize. I don't think players would choose the draw to 6 very often.

Eyre by spiralstaircase
It's a bit of a stretch to call this a Throne Room variant, but I guess it counts. Like others have said, the fairly low chance of high-VP return and the fact that the compensation is just a delayed Necropolis makes this way too weak.

Landgravine by Lurker
While Vestibule does something new and interesting half the time, Landgravine just replaces itself half the time. Not particularly exciting.

Desert Throne by Shard of Honor
See my comment on Antechamber.

Dining Room by hhelibebcnofnena
I feel like this is too much of an auto-buy in Engines that give lots of +$ (enough to buy Colonies/Provinces and still have a little $ left over) and too rare a buy otherwise.

Royal Road by hypercube
I think that this would be useless in sets with no source of +Buys, and too much of an optimal self-combo in sets that do have +Buy. RR-RR is awfully close to KC-Bridge, except you also get to Throne Room another two cards afterwards. (And Throne Rooming two cards will usually be better than the +3 Buys and +$3 you'd get instead if you KC-Bridge.)

Aldermen by ConMan
Renaissance is easily the best expansion we've had for a while, IMO. This card would fit in perfectly with the rest of the Renaissance cards. This is an incredible card.

Appeal by VioletCLM
Appeal feels like it'll be either completely useless or completely busted, with no in between.

Queen's Throne by Chappy7
While it is technically about the same strength as a Throne Room, most of the optimal targets for Throne Rooms cost more than $4, so I feel like you'll be getting the short end of the stick most of the time.

Czar by NoMoreFun
Czar is sort of a self anti-combo, since Czars need Actions to play and Silvers to become stronger, but having more Silver means that you're more likely to draw your Czars dead.

Iron Throne by segura
Selecting one blind card rather than any card from your hand weakens Iron Throne way too much for allowing multiple types to make up for it. I don't even think this is as strong as Vassal.

Sanctuary by 4est
Sanctuary is a pretty sweet self-synergy, since it can clean up your deck to help itself be drawn with other Action cards. It's decent.

Signet Ring by Commodore Chuckles
King's Court is one of my all-time favorite Dominion cards (when I have it, of course ;).) I also love Hinterlands, which I think this would strangely fit in with very well because of its on-gain effect. Even though Appeal does it too, an on-gain Throne-Room variant has somehow never even crossed my mind, and this implements it gloriously. Next time I go home for break, I'll be sure to playtest this one with my family. :)

Royal Library by lompeluiten
I don't feel like this is enough stronger than Throne Room to justify costing just one less than King's Court. Although most cards that even cost the same as KC are not nearly as good.

Solar by Tejayes
I feel like if another player is mirroring you, Solar will be way too weak and whoever has it will just choose the +2 Cards each time, or nobody would even buy it; if nobody is buying the same cards as you, however, Solar just becomes a cheap Throne Room. I agree that it would've been much better with +2 Cards as a consolation prize.

Winner: Signet Ring by Commodore Chuckles

Runners Up: Aldermen by ConMan, Commission by Fragasnap, and Vestibule by Asper.

SUPER, SUPER LATE EDIT: I somehow forgot to add Commission and Vestibule as runners up. Sorry, Fragasnap and Asper.

1174
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: February 21, 2019, 01:37:01 pm »
Judging in ~24 hours-ish.

1175
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: February 20, 2019, 05:22:27 pm »
Royal Libary
Action - $6
+2 Cards
You may play an action card from your hand twice

This seems too strong compared to Laboratory to only cost $1 more than it. Royal Library is essentially Laboratory + Throne Room.

Pages: 1 ... 45 46 [47] 48 49 ... 62

Page created in 0.101 seconds with 19 queries.