526
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #106
« on: February 24, 2021, 04:41:35 pm »
I assume Reserve cards are off the table because of the "put this on your Tavern mat" in the top half?
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.
527
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 21, 2021, 02:35:46 am »
Updated my entry with art more fitting of an attack. Still functionally the same as it was before.
528
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: 10 Events
« on: February 20, 2021, 04:43:01 pm »
There aren't very many cards I'd be willing to get at a discount if I had to give my opponents free, immediate-use 
s to do it. And having to get a 
-cost is honestly worse than just getting a 
most of the time. I wouldn't buy this very often if it was free.
s to do it. And having to get a -cost is honestly worse than just getting a most of the time. I wouldn't buy this very often if it was free.
529
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 19, 2021, 01:04:25 pm »
I think you do need the (or reveals you can't). You can always choose an option you can't do, and without that parenthetical, you wouldn't have accountability to prove that you chose an option you can't do.
530
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 19, 2021, 12:56:16 pm »1. +1 Card, +2 Villagers is already an insaneWhile I agree with your assessment of the card, I doubt that +1 Card, +2 Villagers would be overpowered at $5.
Why? Because DXV considered a cantrip Villager Village, i.e. +1 Card +1 Action +1 Villager, and viewed it as $4.5:QuoteThere was a village that was, cantrip, +1 Villager; man it's fine, you can argue about, does it need to cost $5, but it's nice.
2 Villagers is a LOT better than just one.
531
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 19, 2021, 01:34:43 am »OK, here's an attempt - it needs some work (see my comments below), but let's see what y'all think of v0.1:
During Peacetime, you're building up your Garrison, and during Wartime, you attack!QuoteGarrison - $4
+2 Villagers
You can remove a token from your Villagers to flip Peacetime / Wartime.
If it's Peacetime, +1 Card.
If it's Wartime, remove any number of tokens from your Villagers and each other player discards a card per token removed, then draws a card per each 2 cards discarded (round down).
In Peacetime it's a Village+. Often in practice, it will be exactly the same as Village, but if you can find a way to save those Villagers (or get them from elsewhere), you can flip to Wartime and have a Militia like (discard) attack:
Discard 1
Discard 2, draw 1
Discard 3, draw 1
Discard 4, draw 2
Discard 5, draw 2
etc.
You can have an attack more severe than Militia, it will take some time to build up and you don't get any benefit yourself*. To counter that, if do play another Garrison, you could back to Peacetime and use it as a cantrip. (is that enough of a counter?)
And if you do leave it as Wartime, you enables your opponent(s) to have a stronger attack.
Originally, I didn't have the draw clause, but of course that could leave your opponent handless.
However, you could still accomplish this if:
• it's already Wartime
• you have 3 garrisons
• you have 3 actions / villagers to play them
• you start with 3 villagers already
In that scenario you make opponents discard 5, draw 2; then discard 2, draw 1, then discard 1. So probably it needs something to not allow this to happen... Something to sleep on...
1. +1 Card, +2 Villagers is already an insane
by itself, imo. This is way too strong for .2. You can pin your opponents by stacking enough of these, which is easy to do with how many Villagers they amass.
532
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 05:54:25 pm »Since two-thirds of the entries so far are junkers (many of which are more interesting than mine), I decided to switch out my previous entry for something completely different and more interesting:It can encourage mirror play too, which can be undesirable.
I've updated my OP as well.
You're right. Retracting back to my original entry, at least for now.
533
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 04:54:07 pm »
Since two-thirds of the entries so far are junkers (many of which are more interesting than mine), I decided to switch out my previous entry for something completely different and more interesting:
I've updated my OP as well.
I've updated my OP as well.
534
Dominion General Discussion / Re: How would you rank the Dominion kingdoms?
« on: February 18, 2021, 01:58:29 pm »Quote
Favorite cards: Alchemist, Golem, Herbalist
Boy, that's a hot-take if I've ever seen one...
Anyway, my top 4 are
1. Renaissance
2. Dark Ages
3. Menagerie
4. Adventures
And my bottom 3 are
1. Alchemy
2. Base
3. Nocturne
No idea how I'd rank the other 7, though.
535
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 18, 2021, 11:47:26 am »I fear that this is even too good at $4. Sure, Young Witch is fairly weak so it is not the best benchmark but this looks far stronger.
Redoubt should probably be $4; compare it to Young Witch. Rook's wording is ambiguous as it could be parsed "When you [trash this or discard it] during Clean-up"; I don't think most people would interpret it this way but still.
I agree, but that means that Aquila should either nerf it to make it reasonable at
or buff it to make it strong enough to cost . It's strictly worse than Witch, especially since your opponents getting to discard Rook helps them.
536
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 17, 2021, 06:16:11 pm »
Redoubt should probably be $4; compare it to Young Witch. Rook's wording is ambiguous as it could be parsed "When you [trash this or discard it] during Clean-up"; I don't think most people would interpret it this way but still.
Speaking of issues with Rook, as worded, it still passes itself along even if you're discarding it from hand and doesn't have accountability in that case.
537
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 17, 2021, 02:06:59 pm »I like this but I am not sure whether it coul be too pile-y if it includes Green. If you play two of those in one turn, you can empty half the Province pile in one turn.
I found a way to make Scout viable. In some sense.
This is technically true, but why would you want to give your opponent free Provinces?
538
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Summertime (a fan expansion)
« on: February 17, 2021, 12:43:42 pm »
For the removal of the parentheses, parentheses usually tell a rules reminder. e.g. Torturer. Otherwise, if it actually really matters, then you shouldn't have the parentheses. For the replacement of "trash a card" to "one", I think it just generally sounds better and reduces the length of the card's text. (also, I know the image shows a semi-colon, but that was just a typo. Keep it as a period.)
This doesn't function the same (or at least is more ambiguous as to whether it does).
"You may trash a card from your hand and you may trash a card you have in play" has four ways it can be played out:
- Trash a card from your hand.
- Trash a card you have in play.
- Do both of the above.
- Do nothing.
539
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Wilderness
« on: February 17, 2021, 02:55:25 am »
I think Delegate would be much more interesting if it was differently named cards instead of duplicates. Encouraging monolithic strategies is kinda boring, tbh.
540
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Summertime (a fan expansion)
« on: February 17, 2021, 01:33:28 am »Ducat is not strictly better than Parasol, because in games where Parasol's Condition flipping ability is useful, you might well buy it over Ducat. Tunnel is (potentially) an even starker example. In a game with Tunnel, Pond, and one or more Conditional cards, if Pond is the only discarding available, then after you've bought one Tunnel, buying a Pond (which might allow you to take advantage of Tunnel's reaction) is significantly better than buying a second Tunnel, for only $1 more.
This would be why I said "w/o Conditional cards." If you don't have any Conditional cards, then it's a game where Parasol's Condition flipping is not useful, and Pond won't be able to react because nothing would be able to flip a Condition, which would make Pond a more expensive Tunnel without the Reaction, or a Cemetery without the on-gain effect. They are only useful in games with Conditional cards, which is why it fails the "do I need to be playing with other cards from this expansion for this to be useful test"; they both rely entirely on Conditional cards to be at all balanced.
Sure, Parasol still has a use in other Kingdoms if it's the only source of +Buys; but if it appears in a game with Ducat or Candlestick Maker and no Conditional cards, then it's effectively a 9-card Kingdom. Likewise, if Pond appears in a game with Tunnel or Cemetery, it's, again, a 9-card Kingdom. Saying that it's not strictly worse than Tunnel even in that situation despite costing more and not having an ability that Tunnel does because of Remodel variants is like arguing that a card strictly worse than Vanillage would be balanced at
because of Remodel variants.I guess I should amend "every card should be playable even if it's the only card from its expansion" to "every card should be balanced even if it's the only card from its expansion."
I agree that Parasol and Pond should be base cards. That would also give the "Conditional" type a better reason to exist; the rule would be that you include Parasol and Pond whenever any Conditional cards are in the Kingdom. And you don't have to use the base card design that has little room for text; you can just leave them exactly as they are appearance-wise.
541
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 16, 2021, 07:24:00 pm »That is true, but it really depends how people choose. I guess I could make it so you can only receive one of the Boons paired with a chosen Hex. That would limit the benefits gained and still allow your opponents to eliminate one of the Boons by not choosing the paired Hex. Alternatively I could just drop the vanilla ability to +$1, but it feels pretty weak at $5.
I think it would be reasonable if it only allowed you to receive one Boon. You could accomplish this by saying "then, receive a Boon paired with a chosen Hex" instead of "each."
542
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 16, 2021, 06:07:58 pm »QuoteBoggart - $5
Action - Attack - Fate - Doom
+1 Card
Reveal the top 2 Hexes and 2 Boons. Pair each Hex with a Boon. Each other player chooses and receives one of the Hexes. Then, receive each Boon paired with a chosen Hex. Discard all revealed Hexes and Boons.
This is a card that tries to create interesting choices for every player. Tried to make it scale properly, but I am not confident with the wording. I also am not sure if the +1 Card base is the right choice, but it felt pretty weak at only giving you a Boon and each other player a Hex of their choice. Suggestions on wording and top part changes would be appreciated.
Edit: Changed the +1 Card to +$2 to try and speed up resolution time. Thanks to Fragasnap for the feedback.QuoteOld Version
I think potentially being able to receive two Boons along with inflicting your opponents with Hexes makes this compare way too favorably to Bard for just costing
more than it.
543
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Summertime (a fan expansion)
« on: February 16, 2021, 12:54:22 pm »
I think is reasonable for Summer Solstice, actually. It would be a strong , but it's much better for it to be a strong than a weak 
.
is reasonable for Summer Solstice, actually. It would be a strong , but it's much better for it to be a strong than a weak .
544
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 15, 2021, 11:31:58 pm »
Swallow is too strong. By default, it's a Fugitive that can gain more Fugitives, and you can just leave it that way for the entire game. Fugitive by itself would be a powerful
, and this is way better than that.I love the Monty Python reference, though.
545
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: New Weekly Contest: Fan Card Mechanics
« on: February 15, 2021, 04:51:46 pm »I'm struggling to see how the Conditional type is justified, unless a card ever needs to interact with them specifically. Each different card needs its own set of conditions, so the Conditional type isn't really doing one common thing, and there's no unseen rule that needs explaining.But then there's also Fate/Doom cards to bring out Boons/Hexes, even though the cards already mention them.
Looter, for instance, explains not just adding the Ruins to the game, but also 10 per player, shuffled, and only the top one is visible. Players can refer to the rulebook to be reminded of all those unseen extra rules.
Artifacts, by comparison, don't need a type, nor anything with the journey token. You see them mentioned in the card's text, that prompts you to get them out the box, and that's it, no other rules.
Also, you can write which side starts face up on the relevant side of the Condition card itself.
They don't refer to specific Boons or Hexes, though. Giving cards the Conditional type is more analogous to giving cards that give out Artifacts a type.
546
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #105: Attack with Choices
« on: February 15, 2021, 04:22:25 pm »
547
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #104: Raise the Ceiling
« on: February 14, 2021, 04:06:04 pm »Decently, but probably somewhat worse than Appraiser (which used to be a Runner-up before I trimmed them).
How many runners-up would there have been if you didn't decide to trim them down to 5?
548
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest #104: Raise the Ceiling
« on: February 14, 2021, 03:54:46 pm »
Congratulations, gambit05!
@silverspawn: Just out of curiosity, how would my retracted entry, Mayor, have done?
@silverspawn: Just out of curiosity, how would my retracted entry, Mayor, have done?
549
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Summertime (a fan expansion)
« on: February 14, 2021, 12:51:17 pm »New Moon probably doesn't need the upper cost limit of. The only Action card that would prevent you from ever getting is Prince, and it's not worth adding a restriction that prevents gaining just one Action card.
Ignore this comment. I just realized that I misread New Moon too, I thought it could only gain Actions. Since it can gain any card type, it could just be limited to non-Victory cards. That's what I get for trying to comment on an entire expansion at nearly 1 in the morning.
550
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Dominion: Summertime (a fan expansion)
« on: February 14, 2021, 02:51:19 am »
What side do each of the Conditions start on? I assume the first side listed?
This seems really weak. The Easy Living effect is strictly worse than Workshop (in fact, when Easy Living and Cool are both face up, it's usually significantly worse than Squire, a mid-tier
), and the Attack isn't particularly strong for being attached to a that does nothing to benefit you (when it attacks).
EDIT: It's not quite as weak as I thought, because I didn't see the "onto your deck" part before now. I still think it's weak, though.
It says "discard this to your hand." I assume that's supposed to be "discard thistofrom your hand," in which case it doesn't need the "from your hand," as that is implied with discarding. It and Parasol both have the same problem, which is that they're only useful if you're playing with a bunch of Summertime cards. In my opinion, every card should be playable even if it's the only card you're using from its expansion. Both Pond and Parasol fail that test (w/o Conditional cards, Pond is a more expensive Tunnel without the Reaction, and Parasol is a Ducat without the on-gain effect that gives + instead of a Coffer, which is almost strictly worse than +1 Coffer).
New Moon probably doesn't need the upper cost limit of. The only Action card that would prevent you from ever getting is Prince, and it's not worth adding a restriction that prevents gaining just one Action card.
+2 Cards, +1 Action, +, discard two cards is already quite a good in my opinion, and this is strictly better than that. Also, the versatility with the last option is a bigger edge than being able to get a second +Action and a +Buy at the same time (Festival). So this is too good by comparison to Festival as well, imo.
It feels redundant to repeat the "for each in the cost of the Attack" phrase. Also, it's not clear whether the Reaction window is before or after the Attack resolves, and the Reaction needs to specify "set this aside from your hand." Here's my suggested wording:
This seems really weak. The Easy Living effect is strictly worse than Workshop (in fact, when Easy Living and Cool are both face up, it's usually significantly worse than Squire, a mid-tier
), and the Attack isn't particularly strong for being attached to a that does nothing to benefit you (when it attacks).EDIT: It's not quite as weak as I thought, because I didn't see the "onto your deck" part before now. I still think it's weak, though.
It says "discard this to your hand." I assume that's supposed to be "discard this
instead of a Coffer, which is almost strictly worse than +1 Coffer).New Moon probably doesn't need the upper cost limit of
. The only Action card that would prevent you from ever getting is Prince, and it's not worth adding a restriction that prevents gaining just one Action card.
+2 Cards, +1 Action, +
, discard two cards is already quite a good in my opinion, and this is strictly better than that. Also, the versatility with the last option is a bigger edge than being able to get a second +Action and a +Buy at the same time (Festival). So this is too good by comparison to Festival as well, imo.
It feels redundant to repeat the "for each
in the cost of the Attack" phrase. Also, it's not clear whether the Reaction window is before or after the Attack resolves, and the Reaction needs to specify "set this aside from your hand." Here's my suggested wording:Quote
When another player plays an Attack card, you may first set this aside from your hand. If you do, +1 Card per $1 the Attack costs, then discard that many cards. At the start of your next turn, return this to your hand and +1 Card.That said, the Reaction is way too strong. I'd never buy a Witch if I risk giving my opponents a total of +6 Cards whenever I play one! The Reaction makes Attacks completely undesirable, and if nobody gets Attacks, then TC becomes just a very overpriced Poacher. And that's not even mentioning that you get even more cards if you have multiple TCs in hand or draw any with the Reaction. And there isn't even any risk in stocking up on TCs like there is with Moats, because TCs are Cantrips!