Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

26

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 17, 2020, 10:37:48 am »

Zimbabwe Money - $4 - Treasure
+$7
+1 Buy
Double the coin cost of all cards and events.

Combos with Monument.

You probably mean Bishop (as well as Apprentice and Raze). Also debt cost cards become incredibly cheap.
puppy: Is it "while this is in play" or "until end of turn"? The difference is in interaction with thrones and impostors like BOM

I think he meant that because you double the cost permanently (obviously unintentionally) after a few plays nobody will be able to afford any non-$0 cards so you just accumulate vp with Monument and the game never ends.

27

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 16, 2020, 03:18:42 pm »

Promenade (Action, $6).

You may play an Action card from your hand twice.
You may return one of your Villagers. If you did, play it a third time.
---
When you gain this, +1 Villager.

A Throne Room variant that lets you upgrade to King's Court if you have a Villager to hand.

This is especially powerful with cards that provide +Villagers, e.g. Patron or Acting Troupe, since those can be used with for the 3rd play.

For Acting Troupe it's basically +10 Villagers!!

It's practically a dead card if it's the only source of Villagers, though.

How? It's a Throne Room that's a King's Court for the first time you play it.

Yes, but it only costs less than a King's Court. It's so much worse than King's Court for being a similar price.

There's a huge gulf between much worse than King's Court and practically dead.

Yeah. This is just a more-expensive Throne Room that has a stronger effect than Throne Room. I dunno if it's weak at or not, but it seemed weird to use the term "dead" when that generally refers to something like Stables in a hand with no treasure; or when people make fan cards that do almost nothing unless there's an attack available, etc. Even if the card were just literally Throne Room but costing , I wouldn't think to use the term "dead".

Would this work better as a $5? I wasn't sure initially if it should cost $5 or $6; eventually I erred on the side of caution.

I think $6 is an appropriate cost. I'd generally advise against using busted cards like King's Court as a benchmark to balance other cards and comparing this to the $5 Throne variants it seems clearly much stronger than those to me.

28

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 14, 2020, 05:52:20 pm »

Promenade (Action, $6).

You may play an Action card from your hand twice.
You may return one of your Villagers. If you did, play it a third time.
---
When you gain this, +1 Villager.

A Throne Room variant that lets you upgrade to King's Court if you have a Villager to hand.

This is especially powerful with cards that provide +Villagers, e.g. Patron or Acting Troupe, since those can be used with for the 3rd play.

For Acting Troupe it's basically +10 Villagers!!

It's practically a dead card if it's the only source of Villagers, though.

How? It's a Throne Room that's a King's Court for the first time you play it.

Yes, but it only costs less than a King's Court. It's so much worse than King's Court for being a similar price.

There's a huge gulf between much worse than King's Court and practically dead.

29

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 14, 2020, 12:51:36 pm »

This doubles the Actions your non-terminals give. It only works when you get exactly +1 Action so it wouldn't work on e.g. Villages. It might want to cost $7 given the abundance of +1 Action cards we have these days.

30

Variants and Fan Cards / Re: Up to Date Guide to Fan Card Creation

« on: January 07, 2020, 06:58:05 pm »

I've only skimmed through this so far but it seems like a good write up! The only thing that really stuck out to me was this statement:

• Compare the Empires expansion with the base set or Renaissance, as Donald designed these to be high skill and low skill respectively.

LastFootnote should be able to correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think Empires was particularly designed to be high skill, it might have ended up that way but I haven't seen Donald say anywhere that it was particularly a goal of the expansion. And I'm pretty sure the goal with Renaissance was to make the mechanics of the cards less complex, not making the strategy less complex/lower skill. (Plus if Donald was trying to make things less skill intensive then he failed miserably there!)

31

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: January 07, 2020, 01:02:43 pm »

Not sure if this counts, Metal tokens are just a generic token used to track this card.

32

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 30, 2019, 11:58:15 am »

Shipwright
$4 Action
Choose one: Gain a card costing up to $3; or put your -$2 cost token on an Action Supply pile. (Cards from that pile cost $2 less on your turns, but not less than $0.)

33

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 19, 2019, 03:41:56 pm »

I can explain the flavour of all the abilities if you need.

Please do

If I were to try, I can explain the top half, they journey far to see the baby Jesus(Journey token), then they present gifts of Gold and Spices (I assume Coffers has something to do with Spices, not too familiar with the card), but I don't see the thematic explanation behind the optional Minion-like effect.

Yeah you got it, the coffers are supposed to be the frankincense and myrrh. It isn't a Minion effect, it's a Guide effect because they were guided by a star... it's a bit of a stretch.

34

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 15, 2019, 05:40:18 pm »

I can explain the flavour of all the abilities if you need.

This probably needs at least +1 Action to be viable, considering it does nothing every other time you play it. Ranger and Giant at least give small benefits whenever you play them and don't benefit your opponents in the process. Granted, Pilgrimage does nothing every other time, but it has a much higher ceiling than this card, doesn't cost an Action to use, and again, it doesn't benefit your opponents.

Agreed that this is a bit weak. I don't think the fact that this does nothing rather than very little on its off turn is particularly relevant, I think you could argue that Ranger would be better if it gave both buys on the 2nd play.

Giving this +1 Action is definitely not the thing to do, largely because of how that undermines the Journey token dynamic but also that seems way too strong for a $4 to me. I'd go with this change:

35

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 15, 2019, 04:18:25 pm »

I can explain the flavour of all the abilities if you need.

36

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 03:32:32 pm »

Haha, no it's fine, I was just curious if we both came up with the same idea independently. Like I said although they use a similar mechanic they're still quite different.

Yeah it was from trying to make a self gaining card that wouldn't auto empty its pile like Magpie does. I think it's a compelling mechanic so I'm not surprised someone else came up with it!

37

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 11:38:29 am »

Oh god my title is Scout now, what kind of cruel prank is this.

Gazbag I gotta ask, did you come up with Cats before or after reading my Millstone card? I'm sure it plays differently (Cats is to Lab as Millstone is to Gold), but the structural similarity is there

Ah shoot, I checked to make sure nobody did a similar thing but I must have glossed over Millstone because it's a Treasure. I can retire Cats from the contest if you want, it was more of a tongue-in-cheek thing anyway with the name.

38

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: December 12, 2019, 09:47:40 am »

Cats
$4 Action
+2 Cards
Choose one: Gain a Cats; or +1 Action and return this to the Supply.

Hopefully the name isn't too similar to Rats and Bats.

39

Dominion League / Re: Season 37 - Signups

« on: December 02, 2019, 05:34:41 am »

Returning (SamE dragged me back)

Username: Gazbag
Timezone: Europe/London
Last played season 31, C4, finishing 6th

40

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 27, 2019, 05:32:48 pm »

Splice by Gazbag 
I'd love to see a working version of this, but your version looks rather... unfinished to say it at least.

No it was definitely finished, it was just a terrible design!

Congrats pst!

41

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 23, 2019, 07:04:24 am »

Fan's Creation
Type: ?
Cost: ?

Set up:
Choose a kingdom card from Weekly Design Contest Thread. This is that card until the game ends.

This is so unbalanced I don't know where to begin!

42

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 21, 2019, 08:33:53 am »

So obviously there's a huge gulf in power between the strongest and weakest combinations (my votes go to Encampment+Experiment and Poor House+Beggar) so this isn't trying to be balanced 100% of the time. I think 3P is a good price for the average case and the Potion at least somewhat tempers the most absurd combinations. It's possible that it should be limited to terminal Actions only to make it a bit more consistent but that isn't nearly as cool.

I've always been unsure what "unused" actually means in Dominion. Is it cards not in the Kingdom or is it cards not in that game. The former (and what I believe Black Market suggest) means you could choose the same card twice. Not so much a big deal, just curious what your interpretation is.

Also, I believe it is "your mat" and not "the mat".

I probably should have specified Kingdom cards, the intent is that it's two different cards. To me that's more of a rule book/faq clarification thing because the Black Market rules have always been more of a do what you like thing. There is only one mat so it is "the mat".

43

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 20, 2019, 08:35:16 pm »

So obviously there's a huge gulf in power between the strongest and weakest combinations (my votes go to Encampment+Experiment and Poor House+Beggar) so this isn't trying to be balanced 100% of the time. I think 3P is a good price for the average case and the Potion at least somewhat tempers the most absurd combinations. It's possible that it should be limited to terminal Actions only to make it a bit more consistent but that isn't nearly as cool.

44

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 01, 2019, 05:47:22 pm »

This compares very favorably to bandit. I wonder if you could put the benefit other players on every play rather than just on gain? It’s a nice other player interaction.

I don't see how you could directly compare the trashing attack of Bandit with that trashing of Gild. Perhaps I am too stupid but I don't immediately see how one or the other are on average better. For example in a Kingdom with decent trashing, you don't need Gild's trashing and do perhaps prefer Bandit (as decks are thinner it also hits more often). If there is no thinning, you do perhaps prefer Gild.
The main issue I see is not the power level of Gild, that is fine even without the stuff underneath the line. But a money Kingdom card and an engine Heirloom that needs money to trigger and improve Actions are kind of antithetical.

I agree about Bandit, also Bandit is a pretty weak card anyway so something comparing favourably doesn't seem like an issue. The idea is that Gild gives a decent way to add Golds to your deck to help trigger Ingot but isn't an automatic target for the token. I think you don't want to build too much synergy into this kind of thing so it doesn't dominate games too much, the tension between Ingots requirement and payoff is intentional. If it was all engine benefiting stuff or all money stuff I think that would be a problem.

I don't dislike the use of Adventure tokens without the craziness of Adventure, on the contrary!
But here the two things simply overlap too much. We knwo that stuff from Soothsayer. You start the game, intend to play it engine-ish but then realize that all the Golds simply steer the game more towards money.
If Ingot would provide one of the other tokens it would be better IMO.

I chose the +$1 token as the other tokens are more variable in strength. For instance when Smithy is on the board then the game could just devolve into who gets their +1 Action Ingot token on Smithy first, but on some boards you have plenty of Villages already or there aren't many terminals you need and the token is much less important there. The +$1 token is a little more consistent as something that's always nice to have but never particularly key. I also don't want the Gild/Ingot package to do too many different things at once and the +$1 token is also more thematic.

45

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: November 01, 2019, 07:47:09 am »

This compares very favorably to bandit. I wonder if you could put the benefit other players on every play rather than just on gain? It’s a nice other player interaction.

I don't see how you could directly compare the trashing attack of Bandit with that trashing of Gild. Perhaps I am too stupid but I don't immediately see how one or the other are on average better. For example in a Kingdom with decent trashing, you don't need Gild's trashing and do perhaps prefer Bandit (as decks are thinner it also hits more often). If there is no thinning, you do perhaps prefer Gild.
The main issue I see is not the power level of Gild, that is fine even without the stuff underneath the line. But a money Kingdom card and an engine Heirloom that needs money to trigger and improve Actions are kind of antithetical.

I agree about Bandit, also Bandit is a pretty weak card anyway so something comparing favourably doesn't seem like an issue. The idea is that Gild gives a decent way to add Golds to your deck to help trigger Ingot but isn't an automatic target for the token. I think you don't want to build too much synergy into this kind of thing so it doesn't dominate games too much, the tension between Ingots requirement and payoff is intentional. If it was all engine benefiting stuff or all money stuff I think that would be a problem.

46

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: October 30, 2019, 12:24:20 pm »

Gild
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a Gold.
Heirloom: Ingot

Ingot
Types: Treasure, Heirloom
Cost: $3
$1. When you play this, if you have a Gold, Silver and Copper in play, you may trash this, to move your +$1 token to an Action Supply pile. (When you play a card from that pile, you first get +$1.)

I like Ingot a lot. I mostly worry that Gild will speed the game up too often that the +$1 token won't matter. I might take notes from Altar and make Gild cost $6.  It would be a weaker $6 for sure, but I worry it would be domineering as a $5 in how it doesn't increase your stop-density.  Comparisons to Mine are not warranted as this turns Coppers and even Estates into Gold, which is wildly better. Comparisons to Dismantle might make more sense, but not quite because Dismantle actually floods your deck when you're trashing Estates, so this remains wildly better than that official card too.  I think it is unique enough, but plays largely against Ingot.  I'm not sure how I'd feel better about it without complicating Gild's pure simplicity.

Thanks for kicking up the discussion! I thought about Altar and the $6 cost and I think it would lead to frustrating one-sided games more often and so the gameplay would be worse than a $5 cost. The change I would make is something like this:


What I'm thinking regarding Gild is that it isn't blatantly mispriced or unbalanced in its current form and I don't think you can really prove either way without playtesting so I'd rather keep the cleaner version for this contest and if Commodore disagrees with me I can live with that. But to expand a bit I think the main risk of Gild being too strong would be it  enabling boring money strategies, Ingot helps prevent this as it is both easier to trigger in, and gives more benefit to, the more exciting Action chaining decks.
 
I also realised Ingot had the wrong cost so I've edited it in the original post to cost $0.

47

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: October 27, 2019, 12:42:24 pm »

Gild gains Gold without bloating your deck to help activate Ingot, there's synergy but it's hopefully not too in your face. It's simple because Ingot is an Heirloom and uses an Adventures token so there's quite a lot going on there. It's supposed to be a classic Gold gainer with a bonus for $5, along the lines of Bandit or Courtier but trashing might be a little big of a bonus for a $5, especially alongside Ingot. I have ideas for a potential drawback but I thought I'd see what people think of the simpler version first. Ingot is trying to be a less over the top Magic Lamp sort of thing.

Gild seems too good when compared to Mine, I think.

Mine is one of the weakest cards in the game so I wouldn't use it as a point of comparison myself.

48

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: October 27, 2019, 12:04:36 pm »

Gild gains Gold without bloating your deck to help activate Ingot, there's synergy but it's hopefully not too in your face. It's simple because Ingot is an Heirloom and uses an Adventures token so there's quite a lot going on there. It's supposed to be a classic Gold gainer with a bonus for $5, along the lines of Bandit or Courtier but trashing might be a little big of a bonus for a $5, especially alongside Ingot. I have ideas for a potential drawback but I thought I'd see what people think of the simpler version first. Ingot is trying to be a less over the top Magic Lamp sort of thing.

Edit: Ingot cost fixed to be $0.

49

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: October 24, 2019, 03:59:14 pm »

congrats to CC and Gazbag!

Thanks! Commodore's was my favourite this week too so I'm glad it won! 

50

Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread

« on: October 19, 2019, 10:36:42 pm »

Oh nice. This was my first alternate for last week anyway.

Practise • $3 • Event
Play a non-Command, non-Duration Action card whose cost is $4 or less from the Supply, leaving it there. Take the Bow or the Rosin.

Bow • Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play a card whose cost is $5 or less instead.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)

Rosin • Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play the selected card twice, leaving it in the Supply.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)

Notes:

• Bow lets you bypass Potion costs. This is intentional. cleaner to get rid of this and fix the "play debt cards for free"
• Rosin probably doesn't need the reminder text Rosin now actually uses its reminder text
• Practise now can't play Duration cards, because the tracking on that would be a mess.

Big shout-out to Fragasnap for making me think what an event/command card would look like, and to Gubump + scolapasta for reminding me that: Hey Debt exists and you should probably fix this.

In my dreams, I have a Plan, if I got me Wine Merchant ah, I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd Fool around and have a Ball...

Too easy to loop.

i'm not following what you're saying here

If I understand correctly Practise produces unbounded +$ and +buy with anything that gives at least +$2 and +1 Buy with Rosin. I'm pretty sure you win on turn 1 with a $4 hand and Messenger/Nomad Camp on the board. It needs a once per turn clause or some other way to stop you buying it over and over with +buy cards.