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 - anordinaryman

Filter to certain boards:

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13
276
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 26, 2019, 11:38:46 am »


Here's my entry.  Smelter is an odd trash for benefit card that offers a choice of either a Salvager/Beggar effect (trash a card, gain a bunch of Coppers to your hand) or a Forge-like gaining effect that works only on Coppers.  Early game, it's nice for turning clumps of Coppers into Silvers or engine parts, or occasionally for trashing Estates to hit a certain price point.  Later, the two options can work more closely in tandem (especially if you're able to play multiples per turn) for trashing expensive cards into Coppers and then the Coppers into Provinces.  Also be alert: Smelters can empty the Copper pile very quickly if you're not careful.

This is an amazingly designed card. It is very simple to understand since the two effects are basically mirrors of each other. Having a weak forge and a weak salvager with self-synergy and combined into one card... I just love this card. I very much could see this card existing in a Dominion expansion. Nice work!

277
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 26, 2019, 09:10:22 am »
CHALLENGE #34 - No Vanilla Bonuses Submission:

Quote
Consul
Type: Action
Cost: $4

Trash a card from your hand. The player to your left chooses an action card costing more than it for you to gain and play.



You probably want to add "other than Consul".

Why? Part of the risk/fun for me is that your opponent could turn the rest of your hand into consuls. Do you consider this too much of a weakness? Is the pile-driving potential too not-Dominion-y? This got heavily up-voted, so can you or anyone who up-voted it help me understand? There's a perspective I'm not seeing.

 It is intended that Consuls aren't so bad for you to gain since they cost 4 -- you can consul a consul into a 5-cost card. I have another solution in mind, but I wanted to understand what the problem is.


278
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 26, 2019, 09:00:34 am »
What are you envisioning is the use for this card? The only case I can think of where it's worth buying is Fool's Gold in a weak kingdom.
Kingdom treasures mostly? Or fishing for Potions. Possibly TfB. Now I think it will need to put your deck into your discard pile or something to not be terrible. Also of course it combos with Capitalism.

I'll think of some improvement. You're right that it's still too weak.

Make the card itself a treasure? Then there is *always* a Kingdom treasure with this. Because it only looks through discard pile, it's a lot weaker than it otherwise would be. It might make it too much stronger than you want (self-combo and now non-terminal), but I think the idea works a lot better with this self-synergy. Of course, you would have to sacrifice the ability to fish treasure for t4b if you make this change.

279
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 24, 2019, 08:40:54 pm »
THIS IS OUT OF DATE SUBMISSION. SEE NEWEST VERSION ON PAGE 104

CHALLENGE #34 - No Vanilla Bonuses Submission:

Quote
Consul
Type: Action
Cost: $4

Trash a card from your hand. The player to your left chooses an action card costing more than it for you to gain and play.



Seems like I only submit cards that involve some sort of trashing! My favorite interaction cards are ones like Contraband, Advisor, and Envoy. So, here is a sorta upgrade variant in that vein! I will say this card nicely has some cool synergy with alt-cost cards without having to spell them out, and I like that. You can get your opponent to consul you into upgrading an engineer into a fortune if those are the only debt-cost cards on board. You can always turn your golds into possessions. Good advice! Of course, watch out, your opponent might consul you to bring in more consuls and force you to trash something in your hand you don't want to, like a card that no action card that costs more!

Of course the losing track rule can make you not be able to play the card. I'm open to any feedback. I wasn't sure exactly the best way to phrase "gain and play."

280
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 24, 2019, 08:26:37 pm »
Sanctuary
Type: Action Ė Reaction
Cost: $5

Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Put up to 2 into your hand. Discard the rest.
-
When you discard this other than during Clean-up, you may gain a Silver into your hand.



The normal language Dominion uses is "gain a Silver to your hand." For example, Artisan.

Not sure if a conditional +2 cards +$2 is worth 5. Especially since it is only a +2 the first one you buy. And it requires you to not be able to play a 5-card cost to get the silver gain. I do love the self-synergy, it's pretty interesting!

281
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 20, 2019, 12:06:04 am »


Tithe
Reaction - $1
When you buy any Action card in the supply, you may discard this from your hand. Trash a card from your hand for each $1 the Action cost.
-
When you buy this, +1 buy and put this into your hand.

This pile can empty instantly. Donald X. Considers this a bad thing when designing cards.

How? Forum can do the same thing, albeit with more required to get multiple.

It's much easier with this. Having a single cost-reducer in play is much more common than having 5. Along the same lines, having $10 is much easier than having $50.

Besides, technically you can do this with any card. It's possible to have 10 buys on a turn. It's just a question of how easy it is. A card which costs and doesn't cost a buy makes it much easier than every other card in the game.

I understand why you attached the +buy. It seems too weak to cost an entire buy. Because the secret in card design is that buys are precious resource, often more precious of a resource than $ is. Especially early on. And you want to buy this card early on because it's a trasher, but it seems too weak to be worth it to cost a buy. Thus you always attach it with a +buy. I recommend the following changes:

- "When you gain a card, you may discard this from your hand to trash a card from your hand for each 1$ the card costs." (I believe that when you buy a card, and then you gain it, so this would have the same abilities as before but now you can do it with gainers as well)
- "When this is your first buy in a turn, +1 buy" (prevents easy pile out. Notice how I take the wording from Messenger)
- You may add a  "This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile)." Similiar to Nocturne's night cards, if you want. I think you might get rid of this gain to hand idea though, it doesn't seem super necessary to me.

I don't understand why you restricted it to only action cards, and why you restricted it to only buys.

282
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 19, 2019, 01:38:41 pm »
Final update.

There are 12 copies of Convert in the Supply

-now you have to think more carefully about how many coppers you trash, if you trash all the way down to 4, you wonít be able to afford a 5 for some time, especially since the cards you gain won't be able to produce $.
-now there is the really complex and interesting decision about how many coppers to trash, and there's many more situations in which you would delay buying Converts.

CHALLENGE #33 - JUST REACT SUBMISSION:

I have made some changes to Convert. Also, convert is meant to be the noun version of convert, not the verb.

There are 12 copies of Convert in the Supply, instead of 10.
Summary of changes:
- I wanted to make it less of a no-brainer to always open double Convert. So, I weakened the on-gain significantly down. There are now more interesting questions... how many coppers can you afford to trash if you buy two. Do you want to be left with 4 coppers? That means it can be a while until you can get a 5-cost.
- I changed the trashing to happen on gain. This allows for synergy with itself (trash a Convert with upgrade, then gain a Convert to trash your hand) and more flexibility. The "may" clause prevents opponents from trashing your hand with ambassador.

Getting stuck with a Convert isn't so great anymore. I think that Smithy/Silver opening, and *then* trying for a mega-convert turn where you trash a lot more cards, might work in a lot of scenarios, rather than opening double Convert. There are more than 10 cards to allow you to delay Convert while still getting the opportunity to buy them later without them running out. It also lets 4 players all get 3 Converts.

And now I'm including my original thoughts that still apply


Well, it seems like I accidentally made something that would have been good for the previous contemplate skipping chapel contest. This sort of acts like an event by giving you the on-buy effect. It's a decent trasher, amazing at trashing the starting estates, but you can't trash the cards you had in play to buy it, and it's stuck in your deck as a dead card. Except it isn't a dead card-- if you can trash it, it turns it to something really special! How do you trash it? You could buy another convert. Whatever this religion is, it's spreading! Be careful, if you had terminal actions in hand, you'll have to lose those in the difficult conversion process. And if you started to collected provinces, well, adding another convert is going to really hurt.

One thing I like is that Convert is the great equalizer between openings. No matter your opening, you could open Convert/Convert and after shuffle 1 have 2 converts and 4 coppers. Not so bad. Buy a third convert hoping to trash both your converts and start building up is a fun way to start the game.

This trashes before the first shuffle. So, there's comparisons to bonfire. Well, as a trasher, bonfire gives you flexibility with the ability to trash cards in play and the ability to decide which ones to trash. You can play a bunch of money to buy some cards and then trash them later. However, Convert forces you to not play your treasures in order to trash them, so it effectively costs at least 1 more for every copper you want to trash. Also, Convert has no flexibility, it always trashes your entire hand. So, while at first it seems like you might always buy convert over bonfire, as soon as the game reaches mid or end-game, you're probably buying bonfire instead to clean things up. Similar to the fast trasher, chapel, The cost of $2 is necessary to make sure both players can open it. If it cost $3, 5/2 would be really brutal as you could only buy a 2-cost card and trash 2 coppers. While the 3/4 player could trash all their estates. The trashing would be a lot worse if it cost more, so then the price wouldn't fit as well.

283
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 16, 2019, 03:35:18 pm »
CHALLENGE #33 - JUST REACT SUBMISSION:
EDIT: this is not the final submission, there is an update to the on-trash posted later in this thread

I have made some changes to Convert. Also, convert is meant to be the noun version of convert, not the verb.

There are 12 copies of Convert in the Supply, instead of 10.


Summary of changes:
- I wanted to make it less of a no-brainer to always open double Convert. So, I weakened the on-gain significantly down. There are now more interesting questions... how many coppers can you afford to trash if you buy two. Do you want to be left with 4 coppers? That means it can be a while until you can get a 5-cost.
- I changed the trashing to happen on gain. This allows for synergy with itself (trash a Convert with upgrade, then gain a Convert to trash your hand) and more flexibility. The "may" clause prevents opponents from trashing your hand with ambassador.

Getting stuck with a Convert isn't so great anymore. I think that Smithy/Silver opening, and *then* trying for a mega-convert turn where you trash a lot more cards, might work in a lot of scenarios, rather than opening double Convert. There are more than 10 cards to allow you to delay Convert while still getting the opportunity to buy them later without them running out. It also lets 4 players all get 3 Converts.

And now I'm including my original thoughts that still apply


Well, it seems like I accidentally made something that would have been good for the previous contemplate skipping chapel contest. This sort of acts like an event by giving you the on-buy effect. It's a decent trasher, amazing at trashing the starting estates, but you can't trash the cards you had in play to buy it, and it's stuck in your deck as a dead card. Except it isn't a dead card-- if you can trash it, it turns it to something really special! How do you trash it? You could buy another convert. Whatever this religion is, it's spreading! Be careful, if you had terminal actions in hand, you'll have to lose those in the difficult conversion process. And if you started to collected provinces, well, adding another convert is going to really hurt.

One thing I like is that Convert is the great equalizer between openings. No matter your opening, you could open Convert/Convert and after shuffle 1 have 2 converts and 4 coppers. Not so bad. Buy a third convert hoping to trash both your converts and start building up is a fun way to start the game.

This trashes before the first shuffle. So, there's comparisons to bonfire. Well, as a trasher, bonfire gives you flexibility with the ability to trash cards in play and the ability to decide which ones to trash. You can play a bunch of money to buy some cards and then trash them later. However, Convert forces you to not play your treasures in order to trash them, so it effectively costs at least 1 more for every copper you want to trash. Also, Convert has no flexibility, it always trashes your entire hand. So, while at first it seems like you might always buy convert over bonfire, as soon as the game reaches mid or end-game, you're probably buying bonfire instead to clean things up. Similar to the fast trasher, chapel, The cost of $2 is necessary to make sure both players can open it. If it cost $3, 5/2 would be really brutal as you could only buy a 2-cost card and trash 2 coppers. While the 3/4 player could trash all their estates. The trashing would be a lot worse if it cost more, so then the price wouldn't fit as well.

284
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 15, 2019, 01:27:43 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.

285
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 14, 2019, 11:19:24 am »
One thing I like is that Convert is the great equalizer between openings. No matter your opening, you could open Convert/Convert and after shuffle 1 have 2 converts and 4 coppers. Not so bad. Buy a third convert hoping to trash both your converts and start building up is a fun way to start the game.
It's only at surface level equalizing though. After you've opened double Convert (which will be the right might on a vast majority of boards, there is a 33% chance that you'll only have 1 Convert in you next hand, which will put you at a significant disadvantage compared to a player who gets to trash both their Converts. Not to mention that there is a major problem with 4 players: Only two people will be able to buy 3 Converts.

I think it's too strong, and it will always play the same (Donate is also super strong, but the question of when to buy it and whether to get 1 or 2 make it interesting to play). Also technically it's not a Reaction, because when-buy and when-trash effects don't turn cards into reactions. It would be a no-type card.

EDIT: I see you addressed the "does not need to be a reaction" question before.

Thanks for the feedback.

I'm not sure if "too powerful" is necessarily un-interesting. You almost always open with Chapel. You would almost always open with this. Chapel is interesting. However, I think you're right, making a double-convert opening *always* the best I don't like. I want to make it more of an interesting choice, do I open double convert or convert/$5.

I'm wondering if you think I could minimize the gain on trash ability to be less powerful. Things I also played with "gain a treasure." or "gain a card costing up to 4." I'm wondering if those would be better. I had another idea to make the on-trash give some benefit to other players like draw a card, or gain a copy of the card you gained, or gain a card that costs less than the one you gained. Or perhaps you could gain debt when you trash it.

The 4-player critique is a really helpful one! I definitely hadn't considered that, since I am way biased to 2 player games. Thank you very much. Do you think it would justify making more than 10 cards in the pile? 12 is a magic number that divides evenly between 2, 3 ,and 4 players.



286
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 14, 2019, 02:25:24 am »
NOTE: Convert has been modified to be slightly weakened. Check out the edit on the next page



Well, it seems like I accidentally made something that would have been good for the previous contemplate skipping chapel contest. This sort of acts like an event by giving you the on-buy effect. It's a decent trasher, amazing at trashing the starting estates, but you can't trash the cards you had in play to buy it, and it's stuck in your deck as a dead card. Except it isn't a dead card-- if you can trash it, it turns it to something really special! How do you trash it? You could buy another convert. Whatever this religion is, it's spreading! Be careful, if you had terminal actions in hand, you'll have to lose those in the difficult conversion process. And if you started to collected provinces, well, adding another convert is going to really hurt.

One thing I like is that Convert is the great equalizer between openings. No matter your opening, you could open Convert/Convert and after shuffle 1 have 2 converts and 4 coppers. Not so bad. Buy a third convert hoping to trash both your converts and start building up is a fun way to start the game.

This trashes before the first shuffle. So, there's comparisons to bonfire. Well, as a trasher, bonfire gives you flexibility with the ability to trash cards in play and the ability to decide which ones to trash. You can play a bunch of money to buy some cards and then trash them later. However, Convert forces you to not play your treasures in order to trash them, so it effectively costs at least 1 more for every copper you want to trash. Also, Convert has no flexibility, it always trashes your entire hand. So, while at first it seems like you might always buy convert over bonfire, as soon as the game reaches mid or end-game, you're probably buying bonfire instead to clean things up. Similar to the fast trasher, chapel, The cost of $2 is necessary to make sure both players can open it. If it cost $3, 5/2 would be really brutal as you could only buy a 2-cost card and trash 2 coppers. While the 3/4 player could trash all their estates. The trashing would be a lot worse if it cost more, so then the price wouldn't fit as well. So, it's kinda like chapel in that it's very strong for its price. But it's the right price for it.

The first clause is on buy and not on gain because a clever opponent could ambassador you into trashing your hand on their turn. Not good.

I welcome positive/negative feedback on this. The only question I had was whether to make the gain up to $4 instead, as the power might fit a little better. But I think I enjoy the power and spike of being able to get the good Kingdom Cards.

287
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 13, 2019, 05:57:40 pm »
I have a question. Can we do a pure reaction card that wouldn't need the type reaction?

Certain "reaction" conditions (on-gain, on-buy, on-trash) do not add the type of "reaction" to the card. Would it be permissible to make a card that only uses those conditions instead of the other reaction-conditions (when an attack is played, when a province is purchased, when this is discarded, etc) that normally add the "reaction" type?

Such a card would technically need no type, but the reaction type would be helpful to remind you, hey this thing does things when you gain it and buy it, etc.

288
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 09, 2019, 04:29:48 pm »
My card submission Dowser gets another update. It is now a 5/5 split pile with a nasty Peddler variant which wants you to keep your Coppers. And it also makes it easier to draw further Dowsers, even if you have to discard a Victory card for this.
I feel like Pendulum is easily stronger than Oasis. Other than that, the design looks good now, but I am not sure they still fit the challenge.

It fits the challenge because it tries to make you skip trashing in general. You want a high-treasure density deck to make your pendulums fire, so it makes some sense to keep coppers around and skip Chapel. At least, that seems like the point here.

Each activated pendulum makes the next one you have in hand more difficult to activate, so it's weaker than it seems. You don't want too many. Oddly enough the fact that there are only 5 of them makes them stronger. I agree the cost of 2 is too low for Pendulum.

Dowser wants you to keep your estates and coppers, thus avoiding chapel. I really love the 2 cost of pendulum for Dowser. It's less elegant but I wonder if a 3-cost Pendulum with a Dowser that specifically calls out "0-2 cost or a Pendulum" would be better. I am unsure.

Dowser is strong enough to make you want to skip trashing, but it comes after 5 gains from the pile because it's a split-pile. That addressed the concerns of it being too strong in the first shuffle. I wonder what it would look like with 10 3 or 4 cost Pendulums that each had a "you may trash this to gain a Dowser" and Dowser is self-drawing (it could cost 2) and not in the supply. There could even be some conditions for triggering the Dowser gain ala urchin/mercernary. This would delay the Dowsers a bit so they aren't over-powered, which was some of the feedback it got the first time around.

289
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: June 09, 2019, 10:44:34 am »
There's two major ways to make you consider skipping chapel. Either make you not want to trash your cards (gardens, fountain, many of the submissions so far add penalties to trashing), or give a trasher that is strong enough that makes you not want chapel (donate, cathedral). I decided to go for the latter:



Chapel is very strong trashing but is weak since it provides no way to simultaneously build your deck. So, this card provides both! It's essentially a one-shot mega-copper trasher + remodeler that hands out debts based on how much of an upgrade/remodel/expansion you are doing. You can get burdened with debt, so you need to have a plan to get out of debt with the cards you gain, which makes it kingdom dependent. Sometimes you can get it instead of chapel, sometimes treasures are the only economy you want and Tithings won't work so well.

Clarifying examples:
  • From a hand of 3 coppers, I play 2 and buy and play this card. I trash both coppers in play and the copper in my hand. I would take 2 debt and gain an embargo. Each other player chooses to gain 0, 1, or 2 coppers to hand.
  • If my hand is 3 coppers and 3 estates, I could play 3 coppers, trashing them when I buy this, and turn an estate into a duchy. I would take 3 debt and each other player choose to gain 0, 1, 2, or 3 coppers to hand.
  • If you have no coppers in play, you trash a card and gain a card costing exactly the same amount. You could turn a chapel into a pearl diver, for $1 by buying this card.

The debt is what makes this only conditionally better than chapel. If there are good economy 4 and 5 costs that help you repay your debt, you're going to trash early and hard. If there aren't, you won't have as good of a way of handling the debt, and chapel (or even bonfire) might be better. That is why I forbid the treasure gaining. Otherwise 3/4 is always very powerful with turning an estate into a gold second turn and paying off the debt. The other player copper gaining cause is to weaken this a tad bit (so bonfire becomes more competitive with this) and to smoothen out the difference between 3/4 openings and 4/3. (The 3/4 player can pay off all their tithings debt on second turn and still do tithings again while the 4/3 player can't as much. The copper gaining lets both players have a 4/4 opening). This could have been an event, but then I had the annoying "take debt at the end of your turn" to prevent instant pay-off, and I did not like that. So, it became a one-shot night to easily deal with the debt problem.

290
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 22, 2019, 12:12:13 am »
[...]
herwís entry:

Dryads is really neat; one of the more creative ideas Iíve seen here, although Iím kind of wondering why you would bother promoting a Traveler in the first place if you plan on going back to it. Mountain Troll looks cool. The others are pretty similar to existing cards and donít excite me much, but I do like that Mesuline is another way to make a Grand Market thatís hard to get.
[...]
The trick is not to go back to the first traveller but to Franfeluche or Melusine directly. So Dryads/Franfeluche or Dryads/Melusine are really one card!

I know that. I'm wondering why you would bother promoting either of those to Dryads if you're just going to go back to them.

Because it's a lost city on play.

291
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Cards with the Best Flavour
« on: May 14, 2019, 11:01:14 pm »
I really enjoy that animals breed like crazy: Rats, Magpie.
Bats might seem like an an exception, but they aren't animals -- they're actually Vampires in disguise!

Goat is an exception, but it does really fit with goats eating everything.

Trusty Steed, Faithful Hound, Familiar, seems like exceptions outnumber the rule.
Yes, but those three are all in the "animal companion" category, and we tend to be pretty good at controlling the breeding of animal companions. Magpies and Rats, however, are wild animals and will breed as and when they see fit.

Well, I had first written a response saying ipofanes, you're right! But now I have to agree with Jack Rudd. Good points all around.

What about something like Rabbits? They are wild but can be domesticated. I mean I guess the whole phrase "breading like rabbits" means they would have to duplicate themselves.

292
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 14, 2019, 10:45:57 pm »
Any feedback is always appreciated, but please keep in mind that the power level of a Traveller card generally does not correspond to its cost.

Not including the final upgrade for each traveller line, I'd say most of the cards are balanced at their "cost." if they were in the supply:
Page -- this would never be bought without it being a traveller. So, this is not priced right.
Treasure Hunter -- looks like costing about 3 works, potentially 2 would work. You might need to slap a +buy on this one to make it work as a 3. The price is close to being right.
Warrior -- This is balanced at 4, but being a traveller makes people tend to upgrade past it, and the final card offers a solution to the incessant trashing. So, if it were in the supply, there might have to be some mechanisms here to prevent the ease of playing a bunch, especially early (other action-trashers are all 5s for this reason). But I'd say it's definitely more than a 3 and less than a 5. The price is at least pretty close to being right.
Hero -- this is a pretty classic 5+. It's similar to Explorer, almost strictly better, but not quite. Think of it like forager/trade route. It would be priced at a 5 in the supply and I wouldn't complain. maybe a 6 because of the added gain any treasure flexibility. But looks good as is. Hm, on second thought I think a 6 would best. Still, pretty close to the right price.

Peasant -- This is totally priced right, it's a weaker herbalist, but still stronger than a 1. If Herbalist didn't exist, I'd be happy with this as a 2 and buy it without it being a traveller.
Soldier -- Similar to Gladiator, it's a +2 with a possible +3 (in this case, more) if a condition is met. It's about the right cost. 4 might work, but it's definitely a 3 or 4. I'd say 3 is actually the right cost for this if it were in the supply by itself.
Fugitive -- compare to ware house, forum, Inn. 4 again seems about right.
Disciple -- this I am less sure about. I think to be in the supply it would need an anti-self-gaining clause (which is covered right now by it not being in the supply). It could potentially cost 6. 5 might work.

So, almost all of the power levels of current travelers correspond very well to their cost. The notable exceptions being the end of the line, which I don't think would be easily balanced in the supply at any cost (Champion even more so) at all.

---

As far as feedback, I think actually using some of those cost analysis (especially for the beginning of the line) could help. Some of them seem oddly priced. I get that it's a 4 so people can't, under normal circumstances, double up on the traveller line T1 T2. But why don't you want that to happen? Could you redesign it such that it would be fine to double up T1 T2?
Personally, I am weary of things that say "other players can't do this." Getting rid of choices/strategies makes the game less fun. Matriarch preventing the stealing of artifacts rules out one of the whole fun mechanics of artifacts, stealing it back and forth!
I don't like that getting to Matriarch a few turns before someone could irrevocably change the tide of the game (they get a few artifacts and they are lost forever).
I do think that the four artifacts you included are quite interesting! To be honest, Reliquary seems really under whelming. Trade a card for a copper? This only helps with estates and curses... so it's unlikely to be helpful but it hits every turn. Seems more like a self-hex. Or perhaps that's the point, do you want to have that to power up your matriarch? Ah, I see now. That's pretty cool!!



293
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 14, 2019, 10:10:51 pm »
Mauler
$6 Action-Attack-Traveller

Each other player trashes an Action card from their hand (or reveals they can't).
If they did, they gain a Ruins to their hand.
Choose one of the trashed cards. +1 Coffers per it costs.
----------------
When this is trashed, trash the card that caused it.
----------------
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a General.

You need to have the looter type: ruins only come out if there is a Looter. You might actually have to put Looter on the in-the-supply traveller, or you might put it here. Types matter since your cards care about the number of types.

294
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 14, 2019, 12:05:52 pm »
Fur Trader is pretty cool, it turns your travelers into great halls, which you know is fine. Whatís interesting is you really want TWO fur traders, which is an interesting difference from the existing traveler lines. But then youíve upgraded two travelers into no longer being travelers. Iím not sure whether this antisynergy makes it too weak, but it certainly makes it interesting. Wait just realized the gold gives +buy, youíll want that anyway regardless even if you donít load up on travelers for vp. Cool idea!

Manor is also interesting, I wonder about its strength. In the line itself I have a way to fully upgrade multiple travelers, (theres trashing, cycling, and a village)  I donít know if I would ever buy a province . 1vp is a small price to pay for a self-islanding province and it letís me green early. Once I get 3 in play, I could just buy estates. I wouldnít ever need to build economy. Iíd love to see simulations but I imagine buying cottages every turn, trashing holding onto abbeys for a bit, while getting an early city hall for cycling and village, then continuing to drain the pile and upgrade fully, seems like a great single-pile strategy. Granted, it seems like a *fun* monolithic strategy, and thereís a lot of tactics on when to upgrade and how to not be over-terminal (a vanilla village actually makes this strategy less interesting and easier).

295
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 13, 2019, 10:03:49 pm »
"When you trash this" (Underground Railroad) shouldn't make something a Reaction. Catacombs, Cultist, and Rats (just to name a few) have this wording, and none of them are Reactions. Also, for Settlement, do you mean "you may play this, and get +1" -instead of its effect, or -in addition to its effect?

Other than that, this line looks really cool to me.

Ah yes, good catch, thank you! This is a remnants from when all 5 were reactions, then I changed them slightly... I will make those edits, thank you!. Settlement is meant to gain VP in addition to its normal on play, which has some interesting edge case potentials (Settlement lets you discard a Border Crossing to gain an estate during your opponent's last turn) but since it's a lab it's mostly a similar effect as simply playing it on your turn. It was the most elegant way to track the +vp without "losing" the hand increase by 1 effect, and without allowing you to stack the same +vp multiple times before your next turn.

There were three other options:
1. Discard the card and lose the +card effect. However, then all the sudden +1vp is not all the time worth it for sacrificing your hand-size increaser. I want it to be an automatic choice, you don't want someone to say "wait I want to think about whether I want to react to this," You want the choice to be automatic to not slow down the game! If you make the effect stronger to make the choice automatic, then it's probably too strong. I did play around with +2VP at first but realized that was way too much.
2. Discard the card but still get the +2 cards. Well, this allows infinite loops. If your deck/discard is empty you can get an infinite VP with just one Settlement. If you make the Discard happen after the +2 cards, well, now you can get an infinite loop with Two Settlements in hand.
3. The other option was to get the +1vp and "set it aside and return it to the start of your hand," which solves the problem handedly, but I find the whole "setting aside" not a very elegant solution. Where do I set it aside? And I think the slight corner cases you get from playing it are interesting. So, that's why I have you play a card. It also allows it to act as a Village on your turn. The cards are mainly good at sifting and slightly increasing hand size. But they can also give extra gains in the right situations (revealing Crusades or Discarding Boarder Crossings) and act as a village (playing a Settlement on your turn as a reaction after playing a bribery).


296
Dominion General Discussion / Re: Cards with the Best Flavour
« on: May 13, 2019, 07:04:29 pm »
I really enjoy that animals breed like crazy: Rats, Magpie.
Bats might seem like an an exception, but they aren't animals -- they're actually Vampires in disguise!

Goat is an exception, but it does really fit with goats eating everything.

Bureaucrat slows everything down (makes you have to redraw your estate).

297
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 13, 2019, 06:56:23 pm »
In case this is easier to read, I can post them as raw text:

Crusade
Cost: $2
Type: Action - Reaction - Traveller
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand.
-
When something causes you to reveal this (using the word "reveal"), gain a Crusade.
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for an Underground Railroad.

Underground Railroad
Cost: $3*
Type: Action - Traveller
+3 Cards +1 Action. Discard a card per card you have in play.
-
When you trash this, gain a card costing up to $6.
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Bribery.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Bribery
Cost: $4*
Type: Action - Traveller
+1 Card +1 Action
Each other player may discard a Copper. If they don't, they gain a Copper.
-
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Border Crossing.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Border Crossing
Cost: $5*
Type: Action - Reaction - Traveller
+1 Action. Reveal 2 or 3 cards from your deck. Put one into your hand and the rest back in any order. If all the revealed cards are unique, +$1 +1 Buy.
-
When you discard this other than from cleanup, you may gain a cheaper card.
When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Settlement.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Settlement
Cost: $6*
Type: Action - Reaction
+1 card +1 action. Discard the top card of your deck. Reveal a card from your discard pile and put it into your hand.
-
When any player plays an Attack card, you may play this from your hand. If you do, +1
(This is not in the Supply.)


Thank you to hhelibebcnofnena for some helpful clarification questions and a card type fix he let me know about.

298
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 13, 2019, 06:54:32 pm »


Here is a set of travelers that have several synergies and are mostly reactions, each card enables you to use the reactions for some other card in the line. In this way I approached it more as a 5-way split pile, than a traveller. You probably want cards at all levels of the upgrade.

 The two Current traveller lines have a way for you to play all of them non-terminally if you get to the last traveller which is powerful game-changing payload. These travelers start off non-terminal, but the last step isn't so game-changing. The point of this traveller line is they assist other cards engines, rather than being one all in itself. Thatís why the cards are not named after people, but the periphery locations and events that the same person is going through. Thatís also why 3/5 are reactions with another "reacting" to trashing, reactions being an effect due to outside forces rather than the card's "action" itself. So, thatís another level of theme.

On one level of theme is the story is someone (or people) escaping religious persecution. So the crusades happen, they escape via sympathetic parties ďunderground rail roadĒ* , bribe who they must, cross the boarder, and finally make a new settlement where they are safe from persecution. In an ideal world, the art could depict the same family going through these events.

Every card has a name that points to similar cards with similar effects, this is the final level of theme.
Crusade -> religious motif for trashing
Underground Rail Road -> could literally be a tunnel (the reaction), and it conjures up cellar/warehouse/etc sifters.
Bribery -> mountebank.
Border Crossing has 2 or 3 option like Boarder Guard, with a reaction like Border Village. In the picture, ideally thereíd be a market just across the border, the market effect you sometimes get.
Settlement is a superior settlers.

One goal was to make it less of a no-brainer to upgrade each time. In boards where Crusade is the only trasher, you may never upgrade them! Or Perhaps you stop at Underground rail road, so you can Crusade them for a one-shot lurker. Be careful, once all the Underground Rail Roads are destroyed, thereís no more upgrading past that. I wonít go into the other thoughts but safe to say these cards have a lot of synergies with themselves.

I'm pretty happy with this set, I am less thrilled with how lengthy the text on the cards is. A good half of each card goes to explaining the traveller exchanges, I think these cards would be a lot simpler if Dominion had a shorthand like " ⇨ Underground Railroad." I don't think the cards are terribly complicated, although, I admit they look to be so on first glance.

*I am taking historical liberties. The term refers to the system of people who helped African Americans escape slavery-- there was never an actual rail road. it was a metaphor so Iím back-applying that metaphor to crusade times. There have often been helpers in times of genocide, and that's what this refers to.

299
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 12, 2019, 10:51:01 am »
I personally would prefer mockups without art instead of just text. Seeing the whole card makes it easier to visualize how it plays.

Thank you, making mockups was very helpful for me! It turns out that some of my cards had far too much text when I started to put them in card format.

300
Weekly Design Contest / Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« on: May 11, 2019, 11:58:43 pm »
Hi! I have a few questions! The submissions are handled in-thread, right? I simply make a post with my submission?

For the particular "story" my traveller line tells, it would be nearly impossible to find art that lines up (you know, with the same person in each of these scenarios). Would it be worth it to mock up cards with image art potentially missing? Would I be penalized if I simply submitted each card as raw formatted text?

Thank you for the Challenge, the constrains inspired me!

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13

Page created in 0.241 seconds with 19 queries.