1
Dominion League / Re: Season 20 - Results
« on: March 07, 2017, 10:58:32 am »
E3
Timethief 3:3 Eselka
Timethief 3:3 Eselka
-I would really like an expansion where the existing themes are reimbursed, aka an expansion containing cards that haven't made the cut in existing expansions or would add in the existing theme. More travelers from adventures, more tokens for teacher, more debt cards etc etc.
Why would you want an expansion of outtakes? I mean those cards were cut for good reasons.
There can't be any more tokens for Teacher without errata for Teacher. Teacher specifies right on the card which tokens you can move with it.
Big Money essentially becomes unplayable.Yeah, but who would play BM anyway?
What i don't like about stealing/trashing a card on buy is that it scales badly with multiple players. If you only reveal the card, the player to be hit first gets the worst result, and other players have been warned. If you decide to only use it later to avoid that, it becomes political. Both of these points get much worse when the card is discarded or played, as you are much likelier to be save once your right neighbor was hit. Or, llet's say it like this, your adjacent right neighbor is a much worse threat than his right neighbor. It also allows kingmaking - let player X keep his card, steal the card from player Y. Oh wow, why does player X have more Provinces than player Y, surprise.
That leaves aside the mechanical issues, i'm just talking about design here.
First of all, if I understand it correctly (you reveal the card like a Reaction and then it is an Attack so other players can play Reactions as in the case of normal Attack) ReactionAttack is a cool idea.
There is the theoretical potential for infinite loops but if you carefully check your cards you can easily avoid them.
Illusionist is strongest when it trashes a Province/Colony. This is obviously a very strong ReactionAttack but on the other hand if the card costs 5$ and does nothing active the opportunity costs are high. I'd try it out.
If you gotta discard Thug to get the VP this is virtually identical to "+1 Action, +1VP. If you don't this scales badly as you get on average double the amount of VPs in 3P games relative to 2P games. On the other hand I like that it triggers on buy, i.e. other players can avoid it via gainers and so on.
You could consider implementing as Duration. It doesn't undo the scale issue but avoids rule ambiguities associated with revealing several times:
"While this is in play, when another player buys a card +1VP."
Illusionist:
When another player buys a card you may discard the Illusionist and trash the gained card.
Thug:
When another player buys a card you may reveal the Thug and collect 1 VP.
both are obviously 5+ worth, maybe a potion added for Illusionist.
These have some rules issues...
With Illusionist, having the "attack" type wouldn't do anything other than cause confusion. The only thing that having the "attack" type does is to allow cards like Moat to be revealed when the card is played. If you can't play the card, you can't ever reveal Moat in response to the card. Note that Ill-Gotten Gains doesn't have the "Attack" type.
Aside from that, it reacts to the player buying the card, which happens before they gain the card; so it wouldn't have been gained yet when you try to "trash the gained card". You could just change it to on-gain though. And I'm pretty sure that currently you can't ever trash another player's card; all trashing attacks force the other player to trash a card. This matters for things like Market Square.
With Thug, it's not clear why you would want this to be an attack; it doesn't hurt or slow down your opponents. If the argument is that they will be more reluctant to buy a card in case you have it, then you Fool's Gold should be an attack for the same reason.
But more importantly, with Thug, there's nothing stopping you from revealing it an unlimited number of times for unlimited when an opponent buys 1 card.
Thug would basically be a positive version of swamp hag. instead of those buying gaining a curse, the attacker would gain a VP.
This will force you to evaluate whether you want the card more than someone else gaining a VP, possibly stoping the buy.Oh, and welcome to the forums!
thank you