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 4 ... 55
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #159: Some Nights
« on: August 02, 2022, 11:02:17 am »
I suggest reordering "a card costing up to $6 from the supply that was gained this turn" into "a card costing up to 6$ that was gained this turn from the supply"

Two points:
• I think all official cards say where to exile from so this technically would allow you to exile a card from somewhere other than the supply, no? This could probably be explained in the FAQ but is not consistent with the official cards.
• It's minor, but it is also functionally different, in that with the original of someone gains a card from the trash, you could exile a copy (from the supply); with the new wording you can't. Like I said, minor.

I think I'd suggest going with "a card from the supply costing up to $6 that was gained this turn" just reordering the "from the supply" and the "costing up to $6".

Their grammar is slightly ambiguous, but in silverspawn's wording, "from the Supply" still applies to the card being Exiled, not the "that was gained this turn." If it said "a card costing up to $6 that was gained from the Supply this turn", THEN "from the Supply" would apply to where the card was gained from.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Heroes
« on: August 02, 2022, 02:44:47 am »
Mistakes in the Rulebook:
  • Campfire FAQ claims Barracks is from Prosperity instead of Renaissance.
  • Grindstone FAQ claims is cheaper than .
  • Pikemen FAQ has multiple grammar mistakes. In the first sentence, the plurality of "player" doesn't agree with "are"; i.e. it should say "after each other player is done discarding their card. Also, "or not" should follow "gain a copy of that discarded card"; "decide if you want them to gain a copy of that discarded card or not." Next sentence should be "you can make different choices for different players"; plurality inconsistency again. Finally, the next sentence should say "if one of them discards a Copper.
  • Last bullet point in Troll FAQ omits a word: "That trashed Copper might even be..."
  • Apostrophe left out in "turns" in first bullet point of Kraken FAQ. Also, 4th bullet point (the one about playing Krakens out of turn) should end with "then they all take their extra turns in turn order."
  • The bullet point in Undead's FAQ that says that "if you trash a card and it isn't yours...then Undead does not trigger" is incorrect. As Undead is worded, it only says "the next time you trash a card." That wording does not care if the trashed card was yours, only that you trashed a card.
  • Crystallize FAQ bullet point about not being able to queue further extra turns should say "this effectively nullifies" instead of "this effectively nullify."
  • Overwork FAQ claims that you cannot use it to replay cards that have left play but returned to play; since Overwork does not qualify that you must "still" have the target card in play, you can actually do that (it does simply say that "you may not play cards that have left play that turn", but I'd clarify that you can play them if they've returned to play since).
  • Omitted word in Refurbish FAQ: "Even if you have a bigger handsize than normal..."
  • 2nd bullet point for Rest FAQ doesn't capitalize Rest like it should. Also, omitted word in bullet point about having cards in hand after a successful Rest buy: "You will still draw a card when another player plays a Council Room..."

As worded, Tactics allows you to discard e.g. other players' Informants, since it only says "from play" rather than "that you have in play." I assume from the FAQ for it that that's unintentional.

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #159: Some Nights
« on: July 28, 2022, 04:40:22 pm »

For Menagerie, Coyote is an Exiler and Duplicate variant that can Exile another copy of a card you already gained this turn. Early on, you can Exile a copy of an Action card you gained to pick up later like with Camel Train. Unlike Camel Train, it can Exile Victory cards from the Supply, so you can gain a Duchy and then Exile another one with your Coyote. The Reaction lets you reveal anytime other players (or you) Exile something, letting you Exile a copy of what they Exiled from your hand. Since it's a reveal trigger, this does allow you to reveal multiple times. So if your opponent Exiles an Estate, you can reveal your Coyote twice to Exile two Estates from your hand.

This needs to specify that it's revealed from hand.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Asper's Cards
« on: July 20, 2022, 02:23:24 pm »
Border Guard:
If there is a Witch but no card that discards anything, Faithful Hound is strictly worse than Moat, so I don't think it means much if a card is strictly worse than another if its Reaction can't trigger.

Difference is, Moat and Faithful Hound still have the same on-play effects.
You said Border Patrol is strictly worse than Dungeon without its Reaction.

There is two ways to understand this:

The literal interpretation where you just pretend that the Reaction wasn't on the card, as you are doing for Faithful Hound and Moat. That interpretation is talking about a hypothetical which isn't the case, as the card DOES have the Reaction. It's factually true, but inconsequential.

Or you talk about the Reaction not triggering, in which case my point still stands. Faithful Hound and Moat have different triggers, a game may feature only one, in which case one card is strictly better than the other, or feature both to varying degrees, where neither is strictly better, or may feature none, where they are identical. A game may not feature Boarder Patrol's trigger, making it strictly worse than Dungeon, or may feature it, making neither strictly better.

Is your point that if there can be games where Border Patrol is strictly worse than Dungeon, there should be games where they are strictly the same? Or that there must be games where Border Patrol is striclty better? Why?

I'm not even saying that Border Patrol couldn't use a buff, you may very well be right about that.

Basically all I'm trying to say is that Border Patrol is laughably weak compared to Dungeon, which costs the same. Getting the effect now and next turn is huge compared to a Reaction that helps your opponents as much as it helps you. As I said in my last comment, Border Patrol is to Dungeon as Moat is to Wharf (approximately), except even worse because the Reaction is strictly worse than that of Moat!

Moat and Faithful Hound having boards where one is strictly better than the other is fine because their effects are actually somewhat close. Moat and Faithful Hound have the exact same on-play effects. A game with no Attacks leads to Border Patrol looking like a complete joke next to Dungeon, but the same can rarely be said of boards with ways to discard Faithful Hound but no Attacks or vice-versa. The fact that the Reaction even helps your opponents instead of just you means that it's really weak even in games that DO have Attacks.

It's fine for it to be strictly worse than Dungeon with no Attacks on the board, but if it's going to be so much worse than Dungeon with no Attacks, it ought to have a waaayyy better Reaction than protecting yourself at the cost of needing to have a Border Patrol while giving that same protection to your opponents for free.

Also, you pointed out an issue with it yourself, namely that the Reaction ceases to be strictly worse than Moat's in 1v1 games. That means its already low powerlevel drops by a not-insignificant amount as soon as you add a 3rd player. Card power levels shouldn't scale that poorly with player count.

Did you ever play with SwampDruid?
Yes, I have. It was overshadowed by way better draw, more expensive cards, and generally being attached to druid. Swamp druid is good when there's a bunch of good 0-2 cost cards. We never saw more than 3 willow-wisps together at once. In fact, I'm considering lowering the price of Faerie ring, because at least swamp druid has two other modes that might be good.

Faerie Ring also has another mode that might be good, and is pretty likely to be better than several existing Boons. I agree with you that segura is overestimating the card, but I also think you're underestimating it. I think it looks fine at .

On a completely unrelated note, Lodestone needs to say "(or reveal you can't.)", as there's no accountability for if you have no Treasures in your discard pile.


maybe i'm misunderstanding the intent here, but how is this particularly functionally different from "When you gain a card, take a token from its pile. | Setup: Put 1 Coffers, 1 Debt, 1 (VP token), and 1 Embargo token on each non-Gathering Kingdom pile."?

Embargo tokens have a passive effect. Your wording would have players gaining Curses each time they buy a card from a given pile until someone takes the Embargo token from the pile, spheremonk's wording would not.


Scrimp • $3 • Action - Duration
You may trash a Treasure from your hand and place tokens on this equal to its cost in $.

At the start of your next turn, +1 Card per token here, then discard down to 5 cards in hand.

Sort of a mix of Guide and Warehouse, and a defense against handsize attacks.

FAQ: if you trash a copper, you clean it up during the same turn.

Even without needing to discard down to 5, isn't this essentially a terminal Research that only works on Treasures? Sure, it doesn't set aside cards from your deck and make them inaccessible for the turn, but that's a minor benefit compared to how much worse than Research this is otherwise.

Hey convenient, I sketched this not too long before this contest.

This looks weak. Sure, the flexibility to make this a Lab, Smithy, Village or Meganecro is nice but the effects being delayed and the very card being dead on play are serious downsides.
You gotta play a Village first and then you need another Action card in hand for the whole thing to work. That is why plain Smithy or Lab are likely far better.

I think you missed the "including this." You don't need a Village first.

Do Adventures-esque tokens like the +1 Card, +1 Action, etc. tokens qualify? If so:

I think this needs the phrase "cards from that pile". I'm also not sure you need (or, in light of the ever-growing list of cards that can be played on opponents' turns, want) the "on your turn" language. However, I'm not sure the best way to get around it.

It was supposed to have "from that pile" wording, leaving those words out was a typo I didn't notice. Thanks for noticing that mistake. About the "on your turn" language, without that wording it would help your opponents too.

While no official cards do this, you could use "your" to designate the cards affected are the ones that belong to you. As in:
(Your non-Duration Action cards from that pile are also Durations with "Now and at the start of your next turn:" before their instructions.)
This has the downside of not making copies in the Supply or trash into Duration cards. This would be bad for Inheritance when you couldn't gain Estates as Action cards using things like Lurker or University. But the only impact I can think of that it would have here would be for Necromancer or Captain, and I don't think it would be a problem since the copies you don't have would neither be Durations nor play as Durations.

I thought of this wording, but then it would be creating the same issues as the original, pre-errata wording of Inheritance.

Do Adventures-esque tokens like the +1 Card, +1 Action, etc. tokens qualify? If so:

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Set Expansion Contest
« on: July 05, 2022, 07:23:15 pm »
My Submission:

Mageling • $3 • Action - Mage - Liaison
+2 Cards
You may discard a Mage for +1 Favor.
You may rotate the Mages.
Hydromancer • $4 • Action - Attack - Mage
+3 Cards
Discard a card. Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a copy of it (or reveals they can't).
Librarian • $5 • Action - Duration - Mage
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +3 Actions, and at the start of your next turn, put this into your hand, then discard a card.
School of Magic • $6 • Treasure - Victory - Mage
+3 Cards


My submission is a rotating split pile. These also use the Liaison and Recursive mechanics. This also fit the theme of split piles of magic users. Joining the official Wizards and Augurs are the Mages.

Mageling is a terminal draw that allows a player to discard another Mage card for a Favor. These will often be drawn dead (except School of Magic), especially early on, so getting the Favor is not hard. Later on it may become more of a sacrifice (especially if you build an engine). Hydromancer is a terminal draw/sifter that also has a handsize Attack. Since you will often want to discard a dead card (such as an Estate) the attack will be of limited value. However, losing that dead card might still be a disadvantage (if a player is trying to get a Librarian into their hand). You also might discard an Action card drawn dead that your opponent really wants. Librarian is the only source of extra Actions. On play it's either a Smithy or a Double Necropolis. If you choose the latter, Librarian will return to your hand the following turn, but make you discard a card (which can be Librarian). Finally, School of Magic is Victory - Treasure card. It is basically a Harem, with an additional +3 Cards when played. Many of these cards will be drawn dead, and there is a risk of triggering a shuffle before you start buying cards.

I can tell you from playtesting a strictly worse card that School of Magic is way too good. I and a couple others tested a card that was worth and gave +2 Cards, for , and it was already too good even for , and School of Magic is way strictly better than that. Not to mention, it's also strictly way more powerful than Harem at the same cost; it's probably fine for it to be a bit strictly stronger than Harem since it has the downside of needing to be rotated to, but not that much stronger.

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #156: When Gain
« on: June 26, 2022, 05:46:51 pm »


A lab variant! Like Stash, it has a differently colored back.

I don't think this needs a differently colored back, because you're not actually putting it in your deck when you're done shuffling.

It does need a different back, since there'd be no way to enforce playing it being mandatory otherwise.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Asper's Cards
« on: June 19, 2022, 04:16:15 pm »
Border Guard:
If there is a Witch but no card that discards anything, Faithful Hound is strictly worse than Moat, so I don't think it means much if a card is strictly worse than another if its Reaction can't trigger.

Difference is, Moat and Faithful Hound still have the same on-play effects. Border Patrol is to Dungeon as Moat with a +Buy would be to Wharf, and imo that comparison makes it clear that Border Patrol is too weak. Border Patrol's reaction is almost strictly worse than that of Moat, and it's on play effect is worse than Moat's as well. If Lab + discard two cards was the same strength or stronger than +2 Cards, Dungeon would be on a similar power level to Wharf.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Asper's Cards
« on: June 19, 2022, 02:20:55 pm »

This looks really weak to me. Without the Reaction, it's strictly worse* than Dungeon at the same price, and the Reaction helps your opponents just as much as it helps you, so it doesn't really add much to its strength.

Wording suggestion, taking a page from Artificer: "You may gain a card costing up to per differently named card revealed."

Wording suggestion to shorten the bottom part: "You may trash a card from your hand to gain a different card with up to the same cost." Taking a page from Swap. That said, Donald is changing effects like this that have to be on-buy to be "when you gain a card you bought" so as to make it so you trigger the effect after gaining the bought card instead of before.

Wording suggestion: "You may discard, in order, an Estate for +3 Cards, a Duchy for +$3, and/or a Victory card for +3 Actions."

The "from the __ pile" part is no longer necessary, you can just say "you may gain a Road." Non-Supply piles can now be gained without specifying the pile as long as they are called out by name (the "from its pile" part is still necessary for Swamp gaining Spirits because it doesn't call out a specific Spirit).

I know this used to be called Hunter but you changed the name because of Allies, but Tracker is also taken:

Donald X is avoiding while-in-play effects nowadays, so you could change this to "This turn, Attack cards you play don't affect other players" if you care about that sort of thing.

The general consensus is that Grand Market, which is weaker than this, is a $7.5 without the no-Coppers restriction, so this is too strong even without taking into account the ability to end the game more easily.

Gain a Spoils from the Spoils pile.

As with Outskirts, you don't need "from the Spoils pile."

Flip your Journey Token over. If it is face-up, gain a card costing up to $5.

I know this is really nitpicky, but the official term is "turn your Journey token over."

Move your Bureaucracy Token to another Supply pile. (When you gain a card from a pile with your Bureaucracy Token on it, put it onto your deck).
Setup: Each player puts their Bureaucracy Token on the Province pile.

The name of the Event is misspelled, while the name of the token is not (although token shouldn't be capitalized).

Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $3 more than it.

This name is taken:

Gain a card of your choice from the Contest pile.
Setup: Make a Contestdeck out of 10 different unused Kingdom cards costing $5.

You left out the space between "Contest" and "deck" in the setup clause.

When you gain a card, you may exile it and gain a Copper.

1. "Exile" should be capitalized.
2. More importantly, this can instantly empty the Copper pile and give a colossal amount of Coffers in combination with Guildhall. You should either say "when you gain a non-Copper card" or "when you gain a card other than with this."

Trade Agreement
When you shuffle your deck during the game, you may gain a Silver and shuffle it in.

I don't think "during the game" is necessary, unless that's there to specify that shuffling at game start doesn't count.

Once per turn, when you play an Action card, you may set it aside here to play it again. Trash it at the start of your cleanup phase.

This has tracking issues with Duration cards.

Spellcasters & Spells
When a card with the Spellcaster type is in the supply, 3 Spells are chosen at random and put next to the Supply. Spells are effects similar to Events, which never go into your deck, but which you can buy in your buy phase. Each player gets 5 Spell Tokens in their color. When you buy a Spell, you put one of your tokens on the Spell you bought. That Spell is now "prepared". The only way to actually perform what a Spell does is when a Spellcaster card tells you to „cast a Spell“. By casting a Spell, you do what it says, then remove your token from the Spell. Naturally, you can have up to five Spells prepared.

Can you have multiple of the same Spell prepared? I assume so since you have 5 Spell tokens but there are only 3 Spells.

Treasure – Spellcaster
+$1, +1 Buy; When you play this, you may cast a Spell. You may discard a card, for +$1.

Treasures no longer need "when you play this."

As with Plundering and Outskirts, no "from the Spoils pile" necessary.

This needs to reveal the discarded cards. See Shepherd.

"But never less than " isn't necessary, cards automatically can't have negative costs.

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Asper's Cards
« on: June 19, 2022, 12:56:02 pm »

If by "it" you mean the trashed card, then this doesn't make sense because why trash a card if you're just going to immediately put it back into your hand? You might as well just reveal a card from your hand instead in that case. And if by "it" you mean the Silver(s), then that's grammatically incorrect in the case that you gain multiple Silvers, and you can simply say to gain the Silvers to your hand, i.e. "to gain a Silver to your hand per it costs (round down)."

This needs to reveal cards from your deck instead of discarding them. As worded, it would go infinitely if you don't have two Treasures in your deck.

Alley - Action - Cost: 5

+1 Card
When you discard this from play set it aside.
When you gain this set it aside. While this is set aside you may play it as if it were in your hand.

My previous submission:

Feedback is appreciated.

Normally, "when you discard this from play" effects also go under a horizontal line. My suggestion for wording:
+1 Card
When you gain this or discard this from play, set it aside. While set aside, you may play this as if it were in your hand.


I'm not sure this would qualify, as this card itself can't be replayed (by itself). At least, as i understand this week's rules.

@X-tra: If scolapasta is right that this doesn't qualify (which would make sense given his argument), then your Grindstone would make an excellent submission to this contest imo.


I think this should choose between Necropolis and pseudo-KC, instead of giving both effects. As it is, just a single Smithy turning all your Delegates for the rest of the turn into Liches without the drawback is a bit ridiculous imo.


Kibitzer • $4 • Action
+2 Cards
Discard 2 cards.
The player to your left looks through your discard pile and chooses an Action or Treasure card for you to play. If they can't, +1 Action.

by "if they can't" i mean 'choose an action or treasure card'; open to wording suggestions.

I think this needs to reveal your discard pile if there are no Actions or Treasures, for accountability.

My wording suggestion:
+2 Cards
Discard 2 cards, then reveal your discard pile. The player to your left chooses an Action or Treasure card from it for you to play. If they couldn't, +1 Action.


Id go with 3 and price it at $4.

v1 and v3 definitely can't cost . Both are strictly better than Vineyard, and Vineyard is harder to get than a ; to buy a Vineyard, you need to first gain a card (Potion), and then buy Vineyard using that card. Costing cuts out that first step.

I'd go with version 4 and price it at .

Split pile, 5 pastors over 5 manses

Pastor • $2 • Action - Blessing
+1 Action
You may discard a Victory card. If you have the Rosary, discard any number of Victory cards or Curses.
+2 Cards for each card you discarded with this.
Manse • $5 • Victory - Blessing
When you gain this, you may put an Action from your discard pile onto your deck, and if you have the Rosary, +1%

What if a little or big shepherd? You're incentivized to green early due to Rosary. Hey look there's some bonus duchies* that help you line up your pastors.
*only a duchy if you buy it when you have the rosary.

The 2nd part of Pastor needs to reveal the Victory cards and Curses (see Shepherd). Also, it's unclear whether you can discard a combination of Curses and Victory cards; I assume you can, and if I'm right in assuming that, I'd suggest "discard any number of Curses and/or Victory cards, revealed."

Tome - Treasure - Cost:5
+1 Buy
When you play this if you have the Rosary +$1
Feedback is appreciated.

I'm not sure were to price this, suggestions would be appreciated.

Just an FYI, you don't need "when you play this," Treasures don't have that anymore.

This cannot be fixed via changing the costs. The simply problem is that the gift for the other players is not much of a gift in the presence of DoubleSplitters that do nearly the same thing as the Artefact.

If the Kingdom card did something else, a Baracks Artefact would be much stronger.

Saying that the power level of the card can't be fixed by changing the cost seems crazy to me. I don't see how this wouldn't almost always be worse than Port at 4 for instance. What am I missing?

I think what he means is that the concept of the card can't be fixed by changing the cost. The problem with Charitable Village isn't necessarily the power level, it's that the Artifact and the effect of the card are redundant. The effect of the card makes the Artifact's Barracks effect nigh irrelevant.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 55

Page created in 0.178 seconds with 18 queries.