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 - Kudasai

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 19
126
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 16, 2019, 02:15:51 pm »
CHALLENGE #33 - JUST REACT SUBMISSION:

Pretty straightforward card that reacts to gaining Victory cards. Reacting with it during another players turn is quite hard, but very powerful when you do as the gained card goes into your hand and is ready to be played your next turn. This is almost Wish level good. Reacting with it during your turn is much easier to pull off, but in general you won't be able to use the card right away. Keep in mind if this reacts to you buying something during your Buy phase you likely won't be able to play the gained card even though it's in your hand. There are exceptions to this like Night cards and Villa, etc.



Anyways, I really wanted a card that reacted to something other than gaining, but things weren't really clicking. Kudos to those who came up with stuff along those lines!


Quote
Frontier - Reaction - Cost: $4
When any player (including you) gains an Victory card, you may trash this from your hand to gain a non-Frontier card costing up to $2 more than this to your hand.

127
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: scolapasta's cards: Blessing
« on: June 15, 2019, 08:01:36 pm »
Inspired by this week's contest*, here's a one-shot reaction for Worshippers, an attempt at TfB, since standard TfB isn't possible with the deferred trashing:



(*) this is not my entry, since it's exclusively for Worshippers, though my actual entry is purposefully written to work with them (as it deals with all tokens that you can "spend"). I'll post that one here once the contest is over.



Notes / Questions:

In an earlier post I asked, "What's the general consensus on Landmarks, Event, Projects that involve mechanics that won't be in every game? The only official ones I can think of are Tomb, and Sewers, in games with no trashing."

I can now expand that question to all cards in general, since this card is useless without Worshippers.

One concern is that it could be used in attacks as a stop card.

Outside of specifying rules that say "only use with other cards that give Worshippers", I could make it part of a split pile, though I don't like the thought of only having 5 of them. (or possible only 5 of the top card)

How have others handled similar situations?

I think this would work best as an Event:

+1 Worshipper and during your next Clean-up, when you trash a card, you may gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

Slightly more powerful so it may need to cost more, but it essentially does the same thing. Hopefully I'm not missing some function here that only works as a card.

128
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 15, 2019, 02:39:54 pm »


Attempt at a Throne Room for Victory cards.

Really Cool concept! I feel like there's some ambiguities on what to do with alt victory cards. If you do gardens, you have to count the size of your deck at that time? Distant Lands would be worth 0? Have you thought about different ways of dealing with that (Like OR 1vp for every 2$ it costs...)?

I think it's stronger than it looks. In many ways it's a much stronger Island. In deck-drawing engines, the end-game focusing on provinces, you would almost never buy duchies. In fact, buying 2 of them could be better than 1 province since you only have to line up one before the end of the game to get all those VP back and if you line up 2, well you got a lot more VP. I'm thinking this could potentially cost 6, especially if you add some clause to deal with non-standard victory cards.

But yeah, really cool card and idea! And it really fits best as a pure-reaction card.

Also a big fan of this one. My wording suggestions would be to say either of the following:

(1) "When you gain a Victory card not worth scaling {VP}". "Scaling VP" is about the closest official lingo I could find in the Dominion manual.
(2) "When you gain a Basic Victory card". More straightforward, but eliminates interactions with a few Kingdom Victory cards that don't have scaling VP.

129
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 14, 2019, 04:52:28 pm »
Does anyone know if there are any ordering rules for Reactions like Fool's Gold that multiple people can React with at the same time? For instance, in a 3 player game, Player_01 can buy a Province and both Player_02 and Player_03 can react with Fool's Gold to topdeck a Gold. But what if there is only one Gold left. Who gets it? Player_02 because they are the next player? Or whoever reacted first? The former seems most likely, but I cannot find any rules on this.

130
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 12, 2019, 06:59:23 pm »
I will post an image and name later, but for now:

Cost: 5

When you draw this, you may reveal this and set it aside. If you do, +2 Cards and return this to your hand.

I figure it's basically just a Reaction version of Lab, so it should cost 5. It's not identical, though. There are situations where it's worse and situations where it's better.

"When you draw this" triggers have been discussed before; the issue is accountability... by the time you have drawn it; it's in your hand, mixed with the other cards. How do you show if it was a card you just drew, or one that was always in your hand? Also, when is it worse than Lab?

I feel that other people have done a good idea addressing your second question. For your first question: maybe it could have a different back, like Stash?

You could make the reveal a specific moment in time like at the start of your turn. This would make it considerably weaker, but I think in an interesting way. You'd also need some Horse Traders like wording so you set it aside to avoid multiple reveals.

EDIT: I meant to say drawing during your Clean-up might be a good window to have this, not the start of your turn.

131
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kudasai's Random Dominion Cards
« on: June 09, 2019, 03:02:23 pm »
I think this version of Blasphemer is too problematic for some of the reasons you both mentioned and others as well. After taking another look at the data I collect, this does seem too strong. It easily outscores BM and Chapel BM. Even at $7 it achieves all of this. Well it was worth a shot, but this doesn't seem like it can be balanced.

132
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: scolapasta's cards
« on: June 08, 2019, 06:12:19 pm »
Apse Chapel: I think +2 Worshipers is probably best as these tokens seem quite strong. A good card to compare this to would be Ratcatcher.

Apse Chapel is the same cost, provides double the trashing potential, most likely has a bigger card pool to trash from, but is a terminal Action. I think +2 Worshipers is fine if not a bit too strong. Of course talking about what Chapel-esque cards should cost is tricky as Chapel is artificially priced low.

133
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kudasai's Random Dominion Cards
« on: June 08, 2019, 06:00:26 pm »
A card that didn't make the cut for this weeks competition. Base-line testing shows this is fairly balanced, but ultimately I wanted to submit something with more pop. The idea is you want a little bit of trashing to play these more often, but not enough so that you don't get the VP tokens. Otherwise, you're paying $6 for what is a $4.5 value.



Any thoughts are appreciated!

134
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 08, 2019, 05:55:06 pm »
CHALLENGE #32 - MAKE YOU SKIP CHAPEL SUBMISSION

Well this was a challenge indeed. Besting the quintessential broken card without being broken itself. Here's what I've come up with.



The idea is that this hits decks without Coppers and big engine decks with multiple gains a lot harder than any other type of deck, both of which are hallmark traits of Chapel decks. This is just a guess, but my hope is a non-Chapel deck can expect 6-12 more in VP tokens from Blasphemer versus a Chapel deck. Blasphemer itself also works well with trashing down, but at a much slower pace than Chapel as you'll likely want to keep some Coppers to not overshoot the pricepoints of cards.

Changes:
[v0.2] Cost from $6 to $5; now only cares about player to your left.

135
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 06, 2019, 06:06:52 pm »
No entry is going to be able to make Chapel completely nonviable without violating the 2nd part of this contest, "don't completely break the game".

What about Donate? I feel like if it didn't exist, and someone submitted it as an entry for this challenge, people would accuse it of completely breaking the game. And maybe it does completely break the game.. at least in the same way that Chapel completely broke the game in the base set. As in, games that have that card available force you to play differently because it's available.

Good point. Barring things that offer superior trashing to Chapel and things that alter trashing within the game, I stand by my original statement. But, I do enjoy being proved wrong. Can anyone think of any such official things?

My entry is very much a WORK IN PROGRESS. But I want to post the mechanic and first 3 cards, in case the idea needs significant re-work. FEEDBACK IS VERY WELCOME!


First, we had Coffers, tokens used in your Buy Phase; then Villagers, tokens used your Action phase. Now we have, Worshippers, a new type of token that you can use during your Clean up phase:



Quote
During your Clean up phase, you may remove tokens from here: for each token removed, you may trash a card instead of discarding it

And a few simple cards that implement this new mechanic, Apse Chapel, Archbishop, Parish:



Changelog:
v0.1 Worshippers, Apse Chapel, Archbishop, Parish - initial

FAQ:
If you put cards in your hand during your Clean-up phase, they still then get discarded. e.g if you use a Worshipper on Fortress, you would trash it, put it in your hand, then discard it.*

(*) if this doesn't seem intuitive, I could change the rule to "At the start of your Clean-up phase, before you discard anything, remove tokens from here: for each token removed, you may trash a card from your hand or from play." The current wording feels simpler.

Secret History:
• Once I got the idea for the new token, my first idea was a Chapel variant. I then tried to think of names with religious connotations: Archbishop should obviously be a "Grand" Bishop, and Parish a Victory card.
• I considered having Worshippers trash from just your hand or just in play. But I think I prefer trashing either, as long as I balance out the cost on cards that give you Worshippers.
• For Parish, I wanted (still want!) something more creative (VPs based on Worshippers?).
• I have a couple of other names for cards that are not variants of existing cards; currently working on what they'll do and will add them soon.


Whether or not this will make you want to skip Chapel, would depend on which of these cards are in your Kingdom. For that, Apse Chapel is clearly the best option.

If the mechanic is interesting, please provide feedback on any tweaks that could be made to the the individual cards. Thanks!

Really cool concept. I was tinkering with something similar, but I was going more for general discarding (during and not during the Clean-up phase). It never  felt balanced though. Tokens seem like a great solution! Do you think having these work with discarding during any phase would work? Make those meh Oasis' into super-charged Junk Dealers!

136
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 06, 2019, 01:31:04 pm »
Challenge #32: Make me skip chapel!

Basically, in a kingdom with the card (-shaped object) you design for this contest, and chapel, make it frequently a viable strategy never to buy a chapel.

Printed things that do this that come to mind include (but might not be limited to) Donate, Cathedral, Gardens, Philo-stone, and Fountain. Entries will be judged based on:
* How likely they are to make me skip chapel (You usually buy Chapel even when Gardens is on the board.)
* How much they don't completely break the game (You obv skip chapel in a game with a $2 Event that says "Gain the province pile")
* How much I personally like them (duh)

I'll try to judge on Monday, June 10.

Just thought I'd share my thoughts on the wording of this weeks challenge. The contest is to make MeNowDealWithIt likely want to skip Chapel, not not skip Chapel. I think there is a big difference here. No entry is going to be able to make Chapel completely nonviable without violating the 2nd part of this contest, "don't completely break the game".

I believe all of our entry's are going to work with Chapel in some form or another, because Chapel is kind of designed to work on any board in some way. It's just a matter of who can get the closest to the edge without trashing the game in a sense.

Great stuff already by the way!

137
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 05, 2019, 06:21:50 pm »
Sorry for the late reply starting the new chain; Didn't think I'd actually win.

Challenge #32: Make me skip chapel!

Basically, in a kingdom with the card (-shaped object) you design for this contest, and chapel, make it frequently a viable strategy never to buy a chapel.

Printed things that do this that come to mind include (but might not be limited to) Donate, Cathedral, Gardens, Philo-stone, and Fountain. Entries will be judged based on:
* How likely they are to make me skip chapel (You usually buy Chapel even when Gardens is on the board.)
* How much they don't completely break the game (You obv skip chapel in a game with a $2 Event that says "Gain the province pile")
* How much I personally like them (duh)

I'll try to judge on Monday, June 10.

Interesting. I almost did a very similar challenge this last week. Very exciting!

How do you feel about cards that counter Chapel? Specifically a card that only has strength when other players trash (or in this case have Chapel), but is otherwise weak. So it would likely make you skip Chapel if other players ended up not skipping Chapel.

138
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 04, 2019, 05:14:06 pm »
Now that doesn’t make sense about the last challenge he said my messenger bird didn’t quite fit the duration effect and yet I based it off of cargo ship which is a duration also even though there are cards that give out +1 card to each other player mine was a little better for instance lost city and soothsayer both let the other player draw cards however if militia was played they would lose all those extra cards anyway. With my messenger birds duration effect they wouldn’t lose the extra card also if outpost was played they would get an extra card on that turn as well. So I don’t get why mine didn’t quite work as a duration?

Which is quite a lot stuff you wouldn’t be able to do unless it was a duration card. I just want to clarify why mine doesn’t work as a duration card.



If outpost was with this card in a game it would be a very interesting game.

I believe what he means is that instead of having a line and the whole "while this is in play" part, the card could simply say "Each other player draws a card" instead. It would be the same thing most of the time... yes, it would be different if you also played an Outpost, or a Militia, on the same turn. But most of the time it's the same thing.

So this isn't creating a vulnerability for you while it is in play... it is simply giving your opponents a bonus, one that you know exactly what it is when you play the card. A vulnerability for the purposes of this contest is something that gives your opponents a window of opportunity where they can do something to take advantage of it. With Messenger Bird, your opponents don't or can't do anything to take advantage of it; it just automatically happens.

Are you in public relations or something? Are you for hire!? :)

139
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 04, 2019, 05:29:05 am »
Mystical Chest - scolapasta:
Receive a Boon. At the start of your next turn, +$3 and receive one of the set aside Hexes, discarding the rest.
-
While this is in play, when another player receives a Boon, set aside a Hex face down (under this).
Really interesting, but the Hex accumulation is a positive and not a negative. Certainly works as a card, but it tends to lean away from the scope of this contest. With that said I can't score this well, but I do think it's a great card and would like to try it out sometime.

My original draft had you receive the Hex immediately when another player received a Boon, but I wanted / needed to scale both for multiplayer games and for multiple boons from just the one opponent. So I switched to the idea of setting aside and receiving one at the start of your turn, not realizing that might steer me out of the challenge on a technicality.

Though I'd argue that technically it does still fit - the vulnerability is set up during the "while in play", even though its effect isn't felt until the start of your next turn, i.e. "(1) Something that alters the game in a way that might not help you or may help your opponents". And choosing the least harmful of the several Hexes is getting Hexed!

Regardless, congratulations to MeNowDealWithIt and great entries from everyone!

Yeah, I think a lot of good card ideas on here were victim to my obscure contest rules. Sorry! Can't wait to see what you come up with this next challenge.

I don't know, it seems kind of like saying that Margrave isn't an attack because beyond the first it helps your opponent. An opponent still has to receive a Boon for you to be hexed, I thought it fit the rules well as far as I understood them!

I see both of your points. It clearly is within the rules of the competition, but the outcome would still have been the same. All good cards, but there can only be one winner and I still think Motherly Witch was the best choice (but not by a lot). scolapasta, knowing you would have lost anyways is not likely any consolation, but I thought you should still know. :|

140
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 04, 2019, 05:19:34 am »
Well going into this I had some clear favorites and I was pretty sure who I was going to give this to, but after writing all these reviews up I've changed my mind completely. Of my 3 absolute favorites: Grand Tour, General and Rally Point I've decided to choose none of them. These are all great designs, but the pricing was off just enough that I didn't think it would be fair to those who hit it closer to home.

How is giving the win to a card you don't like as much fair? Seeing you call my card one of your absolute favorites yet making it barely even an honorable mention makes me feel cheated. I even feel slighted for Aquila and naitchman's sakes.

Fair question. The short answer is it came down to balance. I liked your card more, but I believe it is way under priced. And I should be clear I really like Motherly Witch, just not as much as yours. Again though, I feel it was priced correctly at $5 and yours I believe is in the $7-$8 range.

Really though my outlined judging criteria was focused more on what the card is doing and not if I personally liked it or not. I tried to be as impartial as I could when judging. I have a personal biased towards engine components like your card and not Attack cards like Motherly Witch, but in the end it came down to "creativity, uniqueness, how the on-play and vulnerability interact directly or indirectly, and balance". This may seem counter intuitive to how we should judge, but really my hope is more people judge in this fashion. Otherwise, we potentially end up with the same types of cards over and over.

And let me explicitly state for the record that the order of my judging was:
(1) MeNowDealWithIt with Motherly Witch - Winner
(2) segura with Novice - Runner-up
(3) Gubump with General - Honorable Mention
(4) naitchman with Grand Tour - Honorable Mention
(5) Aquila with Rally Point - Honorable Mention

141
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 04, 2019, 04:56:24 am »
Mystical Chest - scolapasta:
Receive a Boon. At the start of your next turn, +$3 and receive one of the set aside Hexes, discarding the rest.
-
While this is in play, when another player receives a Boon, set aside a Hex face down (under this).
Really interesting, but the Hex accumulation is a positive and not a negative. Certainly works as a card, but it tends to lean away from the scope of this contest. With that said I can't score this well, but I do think it's a great card and would like to try it out sometime.

My original draft had you receive the Hex immediately when another player received a Boon, but I wanted / needed to scale both for multiplayer games and for multiple boons from just the one opponent. So I switched to the idea of setting aside and receiving one at the start of your turn, not realizing that might steer me out of the challenge on a technicality.

Though I'd argue that technically it does still fit - the vulnerability is set up during the "while in play", even though its effect isn't felt until the start of your next turn, i.e. "(1) Something that alters the game in a way that might not help you or may help your opponents". And choosing the least harmful of the several Hexes is getting Hexed!

Regardless, congratulations to MeNowDealWithIt and great entries from everyone!

Yeah, I think a lot of good card ideas on here were victim to my obscure contest rules. Sorry! Can't wait to see what you come up with this next challenge.

142
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 04, 2019, 01:06:45 am »
CHALLENGE #31 - FEELING VULNERABLE - COMMENTARY AND RESULTS

I appreciate everyone's entries. This was a tough challenge this week, but these were all great submissions. I really appreciate the effort! Anyways, on to the commentary.

Repurpose - Gazbag:
Well this is classic Gazbag right here. Balanced and touching on just about everything I was hoping from this challenge: a mildly strong effect and an appropriate vulnerability that seems to fit just right. Your set aside cards will generally be within reach of all other players so this will probably hand out a lot of Coffers to your opponents, but the strength of getting the gained card next turn along with a 6 card hand should not be underrated. Assuming those two things equal out (and I have no idea if they do) getting real value out of this card will depend on players not dishing out too many tokens.

Motherly Witch - MeNowDealWithIt:
Boy I am not the person to judge Attack cards, but I do think this looks balanced. The on-play effect is certainly strong enough that you probably can't afford to avoid it, but the real challenge likely comes from determining how many of these you can manage and that determination will rely a lot on the other Kingdom cards. I also really like that this may be a rare Curser that is skippable the first few shuffles. Not rushing it and losing the Motherly Witch split may cost you the Curse split as well, but you still have potential to make that up with advanced Copper attacking.

Novice - segura:
Ahh the ole' quest to make Double Lab balanced. The discarding at the start of your next turn is a nice touch, but I wonder if it's needed here. This seems to come down to choosing between the strong and reliable draw of Novice or building an overdraw engine from $5 cost components to get the Coffers bonus. I think this could work, but maybe without my burdensome Duration requirement. The Potion does help distinguish the two. If you grab a Potion you're not likely to hit $5 anytime soon.

Privateer - mandioca15:
The overall packaging of this feels good. Will likely force games into early greening though and that's not everyone's cup of tea. Sometimes it's mine though!
The double Gold might be too strong at $5 with this vulnerability, but it's hard to say without testing.

General - Gubump:
Throne Room on steroids! At first this seems utterly broken, but I think there's a lot going on that can reign it in. What I like most is how this redefines the game in a way where rushing down a pile is no longer that optimal strategy. Doing so leaves those cards without any copies in the Supply wide open for double throning. I do think something like this should cost around $7+ just so players can't load up on them while waiting for piles to empty.

Rope Bridge - hhelibebcnofnena:
Another bridge that draws! Didn't that win one of these contest lately? This is a nice clean design with a lot of strategy potential. You certainly need to keep track of how many Rope Bridges are out there. Being a Duration will help keep track of how many Rope Bridges could potentially be played between your turns. Could be really fun, but I worry all of that tracking could be tedious.

Lich - King Leon:
A Swamp Hag that always curses is quite nice. The vulnerability cleverly can be a bonus, but also hurts you. Very interesting, but I worry about the ability to topdeck any amount of curses onto someones deck. Very unlikely in a 2 player game, but more so with 3+ players.

Grand Tour - naitchman:
I gotta say I just really like how this card came together. It got some criticism there for being a Big Money enabler (and it surely is), but I think there are enough ways to beat BM Grand Tour that this kind of works. Villager tokens and mass Market-esque type strategies come to mind. Really cool card, but it does need to cost around $8.

Credit - mail-mi:
I recall some good discussion occurring "some time ago" about this card. I also recall saying I couldn't accurately judge if it was good or not and now I find it here before me for this Weekly Design Contest. Bold move mail-mi! Well I'm still having a hard time wrapping my head around this one. I certainly like the idea of turning debt into a benefit. Mission is doing a bit of the same thing and that works well, so who is to say this can't work.

Politician - NoMoreFun:
Interesting concept. Reminds me of Experiment in the way that this could end up being a one-shot.

Rally Point - Aquila:
Just a great card. Easy to understand, but probably a bit tougher to master. Quad-Den of Sin all at the cost of those all important $5 cost cards. I think you're correct though, this will make Silvers too good. Perhaps this could be balanced around $8. I wanted to play test this one, but didn't have the time, so I can only speculate. Nice entry though.

Mystical Chest - scolapasta:
Really interesting, but the Hex accumulation is a positive and not a negative. Certainly works as a card, but it tends to lean away from the scope of this contest. With that said I can't score this well, but I do think it's a great card and would like to try it out sometime.

Bookstore - Commodore Chuckles:
I like how this solves the issue of scaling player counts with the draw up to 6 cards in hand clause. I still think this could be brutal with large player games though. You'll likely have all your good cards skipped early game, but perhaps this works mid to late game with a thin enough deck. Could potentially be tedious to play having to reveal your hand constantly, but hey that could be a good thing. It'll keep players engaged when it's not their turn (a probable I encounter with my player group)!

Village Idiot - Frolouch:
That's a lot of card types. Certainly a game to be played with Courtier! Probably too swingy to work well though.

Messenger Bird - ClouduHieh:
A solid well rounded card, but since it's bonus to other players isn't contingent on anything they do, it doesn't quite need the Duration effect and thus doesn't really fit this competition. I think it make a great card though. Just something more along the lines of Councilrooms wording.

Copper Pixie - majiponi:
A fine $2 cost card (and those are hard to make), but I think Begger already fills this role well enough. I also think 3 Coppers in hand now instead of $2 now and $2 later is more versatile beyond Garden games. It makes hitting the $6 and $7 price points a bit easier and for less Coppers gained.

Conjurer - faust:
Really cool looking card. I like that you can play it safe by not playing the Action next turn. I really like the feel of this card, but my big hang up is the use of Hexes (and really it's an issue with Hexes and not your card design). Specifically that most Hexes don't stack making the vulnerability on this a bit weak, but when you do get a stacking Hex you likely can't risk all of that punishment. I think the mechanics on this are excellent, but maybe handing out Boons to opponents instead self-hexing is the way to go here. I think it would also be helpful to know what Hex (or Boon) you're dealing with before you choose which card to gain.

Trade Pact - 4est:
The addition of the Silver gaining is a nice touch, but beyond that this feels very similar to Masquerade.


Well going into this I had some clear favorites and I was pretty sure who I was going to give this to, but after writing all these reviews up I've changed my mind completely. Of my 3 absolute favorites: Grand Tour, General and Rally Point I've decided to choose none of them. These are all great designs, but the pricing was off just enough that I didn't think it would be fair to those who hit it closer to home.

So it in the end it came down to Motherly Witch and Novice. Both are great designs and implement my vague description of "vulnerability" very well. Ultimately though I think Motherly Witch is a slightly cleaner design so that will be my choice for this weeks winner. I wish I could elaborate more on my decision, but I've got to wrap this up. I really appreciate everyone's entries. They really were all great designs, but unfortunately we can only have one winner a week.

Congrats MeNowDealWithIt!

143
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 03, 2019, 02:46:09 pm »
I think I'll need to bump up the judging yet again, but it looks like the submissions have mostly stopped coming in. So...

Judging will occur in roughly 6-9 hours!

144
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 30, 2019, 12:47:29 am »
6) I wanted Kudasai's verdict on this. Does this count as a vulnerability? You aren't really restricted per se, but playing treasures defeats the purpose of this card. So in effect, it's a duration that (kind of) prevents you from playing treasures.

Yes, this satisfies my vague definition of vulnerable. :)

145
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kudasai's Random Dominion Cards
« on: May 29, 2019, 07:03:38 pm »
The new promo card is also a 3-cost Duration which is possibly (based on the name) a trasher!

Very true! My bet is on a duration Salvager.

Quote
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of your next turn, trash a card from your hand. +$1 per $1 it cost.

Cost: $3

Not very exciting for a promo, but it could be quite risky and fun to play. I'm not sure if this is what a Duration Salvager would look like, but something along these lines.

146
(8) Draw BB.

Took me a minute to figure out what was going on here. Is there no way to escape the smileys?

No.  :) ;) :D ;D >:( :( :o 8) ??? ::) :P :-[ :-X :-\ :-* :'(

But wait! You just got around it! Tell us your secrets!

147
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 29, 2019, 06:41:05 pm »
CHALLENGE #31 - FEELING VULNERABLE

Design a Duration card that creates some sort of vulnerability to you while it is in play. I'll leave the term "vulnerability" mostly up to your interpretation, but you can think of it along the lines of the following:

(1) Something that alters the game in a way that might not help you or may help your opponents
(2) Something that effects you negatively
(3) Something that effects your opponents positively

I think the power level of the card can be above average compared to it's cost. How much stronger will depend on the vulnerability part. A word of caution though, very strong on-play cards with a very strong counter vulnerability will likely just end up being swingy and may not score well.

No Travelers please, but everything else is fair game! You can do Split piles and cards that gain from the non-Supply so long as there is no more than 2 cards per submission and one of them is a Duration with the vulnerability part.

I will do my best to judge on creativity, uniqueness, how the on-play and vulnerability interact directly or indirectly, and balance. Less so on balance as no official cards exist that implement this.

I'm being intentionally vague on what a "vulnerability" is, but if more clarification or examples are needed please ask. I want to provide enough information so everyone gets the challenge, but not enough to spoil potential card ideas.

Lastly, I'm going to make this a 6-day turn around as I can only really judge on Tuesdays. So judging will start around 12:00PM on Tue June 4th (PDT / GMT-7). I'll give everyone the standard 24 hours heads up though.

Good luck and I can't wait to see what everyone comes up with!

148
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 29, 2019, 01:54:28 am »
Quote from: scolapasta
Lastly, the intent was that these cards are not part of your deck at the end of the game. This works differently that Inheritance, so I'd be curious to hear opinions on that (and if they do count, should I also limit them to non-Victory?)

The general consensus is that they do count towards your deck at the end of the game. Although I don't believe this has always been the case and a good argument can be made that they do not in fact count at the end of the game.

149
Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Kudasai's Random Dominion Cards
« on: May 29, 2019, 12:57:10 am »
Doesn't the -1 Card token break Drunk Witch? It's very difficult to track and people can't exactly play cards without physically holding any cards. (The -1 Card token would prevent the Drunken Witch from drawing, so "until you draw your next card" would last longer than intended.) I would prevent this situation with "until this card is resolved." That way, losing the -1 Card token would be the call for when you're allowed to hold your cards without getting Cursed.

This was an oversight, but I kind of like this niche strategy. It will likely prove too wonky, but for now I'm going to see how it plays out. As rare as the combination would be, I'd like to try it out first before cutting.

I assume that if you're tied for having the most VP tokens, you don't do the latter part. If that's the case, isn't Cleric just an Action-Copper if there's no other source of VP tokens? Also, why trash it at the end of your turn instead of immediately?

Yes, being tied is not having the most so you can still trash. This probably will lead to a back and forth on Estate trashing without much wonkiness. The delayed trashing is there to allow multiple Clerics to be played for their trashing effect during the same turn without putting you over on your VP token limit. The whole idea is to chain multiple Clerics in a single turn for huge VP token gains, then having to suffer with it just being a weak Action Copper.

150
(8) Draw BB.

Took me a minute to figure out what was going on here. Is there no way to escape the smileys?

Not that I've found and I've spent more time than I'd like to admit trying to get around this. 8) 8) 8)

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 19

Page created in 0.129 seconds with 18 queries.