Print

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

[market squire]

I have designed a deckbuilding game in which each player builds 4 separate decks with different roles simultaneously. It has not been playtested yet. And it never will be.

So, why did you design it?

[Awaclus]

I have designed a deckbuilding game in which each player builds 4 separate decks with different roles simultaneously. It has not been playtested yet. And it never will be.

So, why did you design it?

I had the inspiration so I had to. It's kind of like those songs that are supposedly impossible to perform.

[market squire]

Well, if you are criticizing me making an impossibly complex deckbuilder game, I think the main idea I described is quite intuitive and easy. The piles are like a timeline where the draw pile is today and the discard piles are the subsequent days.

Back on c9, which lets you skip another card the next time period: It can also be compared to Haven when it is played right before a shuffle. But as a mix of Vagrant and Haven, i think it is nice but not super exciting.

[silverspawn]

Don't remove from the OP, just add a section for ideas that didn't cut it.

meh, why? I come up with ideas constantly, I could just as well list all of those, but they're way too many. you could argue that the ones in this thread are probably not quite as awful, but if anything that means that I should list the ones that I ended up testing and dropped, because they are probably better than the ones I dropped before testing. and I could do that if there is any request for it, but I doubt that there will be.

leaving them in will just make the OP cramped, and I don't really see a reason for it.

[KingZog3]

Don't remove from the OP, just add a section for ideas that didn't cut it.

meh, why? I come up with ideas constantly, I could just as well list all of those, but they're way too many. you could argue that the ones in this thread are probably not quite as awful, but if anything that means that I should list the ones that I ended up testing and dropped, because they are probably better than the ones I dropped before testing. and I could do that if there is any request for it, but I doubt that there will be.

leaving them in will just make the OP cramped, and I don't really see a reason for it.

The reason is mainly because anyone reading the comments won't know what we were talking about if they are no longer in the OP. Other than that there isn't really a reason.

[pacovf]

Don't remove from the OP, just add a section for ideas that didn't cut it.

meh, why? I come up with ideas constantly, I could just as well list all of those, but they're way too many. you could argue that the ones in this thread are probably not quite as awful, but if anything that means that I should list the ones that I ended up testing and dropped, because they are probably better than the ones I dropped before testing. and I could do that if there is any request for it, but I doubt that there will be.

leaving them in will just make the OP cramped, and I don't really see a reason for it.

But people reading this thread in the future will have an easier time understanding what is being said if the original cards are still in the OP. And if other people try to make similar cards, we will be able to link this thread to list the reasons why it might not work.

AKA: Won't somebody please think of the children?

[silverspawn]

4 new ones. well, one already has a thread, so it's 3 new ones.

c10 - Action - 5$
Dig for a Victory card, putting it on top of your deck. You may put up to three revealed Treasure cards into your hand. Discard the rest.

c11 - Action - 5$
+1 Card, +1 Action, +1$
---
When you buy this, set any number of cards from your hand and all Treasure cards in play aside. Discard them immediately after the next time you shuffle your deck.

c12 - Victory - Reaction - 3$/4$
2 VP
---
When you gain a card costing 0$, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer from the Prayer pile.

c13 - Treasure - 5$
Worth 1$
+1 buy
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card, gain a Silver.

(Prayer is +3 cards, +1 action, discard a card, return this to its pile)

i'm kinda getting desperate for cards with +buy, because i don't have a single one yet.

any comments?

[soulnet]

c10 is a nice concept, though it seems like it would need a lot of playtesting to balance it properly, because its power may vary a lot between trashing and no-trashing (even more than Adventurer or Venture do).

in c11 you should say "set ... aside" instead of "put ... aside". I don't think it is too exciting, Also, why not "on-gain"?

c12 is missing the amount of VP it is supposed to give (even if it is 0 VP).

c13 is a nice idea, though it may make terminal draw/BM too good. Though, possibly not better than Masterpiece. Playtesting will tell.

[Jack Rudd]

C13 could be very nice in a Feodum deck.

[silverspawn]

in c11 you should say "set ... aside" instead of "put ... aside".

oh yea no idea how that happened

Also, why not "on-gain"?

is there an unspoken rule that effects need to be on-gain unless there is a good reason why they can't? on-buy seems more elegant.

c12 is missing the amount of VP it is supposed to give (even if it is 0 VP).

right, that got lost when i copied it from the OP. it's 2.

[Jack Rudd]

is there an unspoken rule that effects need to be on-gain unless there is a good reason why they can't? on-buy seems more elegant.

It's the rule Donald X used when creating the relevant cards in Hinterlands. I think his reasoning was that he wanted the on-gain effects to happen a lot.

[silverspawn]

three new ones

c14 - Action - 4$
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. You may play a c14 from them or from your hand. Discard the rest. Trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing up to 1$ more per c14 you have in play.

c15 - Treasure - 4$
+1 buy
If there are no Provinces missing from the supply, this is worth 3$. Otherwise, it's worth 1$.

c16 - Action - Reaction - 4$
Trash two cards from your hand. Gain a card costing less than both of them combined.
---
When another player's card is trashed, you may discard this. If you do, +2 Cards.

comments?

[pacovf]

c14 - Action - 4$
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. You may play a c14 from them or from your hand. Discard the rest. Trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing up to 1$ more per c14 you have in play.

c15 - Treasure - 4$
+1 buy
If there are no Provinces missing from the supply, this is worth 3$. Otherwise, it's worth 1$.

c16 - Action - Reaction - 4$
Trash two cards from your hand. Gain a card costing less than both of them combined.
---
When another player's card is trashed, you may discard this. If you do, +2 Cards.

comments?

The first one works weirdly.

-Play c14
  --Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {c14, estate1, copper1}
  --Play revealed c14
    ---Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
    ---Play c14 from your hand
      ----Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----[No more c14 in hand or revealed]
      ----Discard revealed cards: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----Trash a card from your hand
      ----Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
    ---[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
    ---Trash a card from your hand
    ---Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
  --[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
  --Trash a card from your hand
  --Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card

This is how it's worded, I think. It's weird. People will get confused as to which cards are revealed/on top of deck/have to be discarded.

Second one seems like a quarry variant. I don't know if it's that interesting. You don't get to combo it with "gain up to" or extra buys, but you can use it to buy real gold...

Don't have any opinion on the third.

[ConMan]

c15 - Treasure - 4$
+1 buy
If there are no Provinces missing from the supply, this is worth 3$. Otherwise, it's worth 1$.

I'm not big on this, mainly because I think it's trying to be Trade Route and doesn't really distinguish itself enough. I assume the idea is to accelerate the endgame once it starts, so it's a Copper-with-a-Buy until then and Gold-with-a-Buy afterwards. I was going to suggest changing it to something that triggers on buying a Province, which then makes it look more like Fool's Gold ...

c16 - Action - Reaction - 4$
Trash two cards from your hand. Gain a card costing less than both of them combined.
---
When another player's card is trashed, you may discard this. If you do, +2 Cards.

I like this one a bit more - the action is like a hybrid of Forge and Stonemason, and the reaction is a neat attachment that goes with the card. I think it would be a better idea to word the reaction like Horse Traders, otherwise you could wind up drawing your deck rather quickly (especially since this card will encourage quite streamlined decks).

[LastFootnote]

c14 - Action - 4$
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. You may play a c14 from them or from your hand. Discard the rest. Trash a card from your hand, gain a card costing up to 1$ more per c14 you have in play.

I think the stack is too crazy for Dominion. If you could find a way to make the card playing last, that might be OK. Like, "+1 Card. You may gain a card costing up to $2 per c14 you have in play. You may play a c14 from your hand." That's almost certainly not balanced, but you get the idea.

c15 - Treasure - 4$
+1 buy
If there are no Provinces missing from the supply, this is worth 3$. Otherwise, it's worth 1$.

I think it'd be easier to say, "If no Provinces have been gained this game". The effect is usually the same, and ConMan parsed the current wording wrong already. Or I did. One of the two. Also, you don't need the "otherwise" clause.

c15 - Treasure - 4$
Worth $1.
+1 Buy.
If no Provinces have been gained this game, +$2.

c16 - Action - Reaction - 4$
Trash two cards from your hand. Gain a card costing less than both of them combined.
---
When another player's card is trashed, you may discard this. If you do, +2 Cards.

The reaction has high potential for looping. As in, you have a few of these and keeping discarding them to re-draw the others. Maybe that's not a big deal. "When another player's card is trashed" is an especially bad place for this to happen though. "Oh, you trashed a card? Hold on. I discard this c16 and draw two cards. Then I discard this one and draw two more cards…"

The Action part seems interesting. You usually don't want to trash a Copper and an Estate, but two Coppers or two Estates is fine. Still, it seems pretty weak when compared to stuff like Steward and Trading Post.

[silverspawn]

The first one works weirdly.

-Play c14
  --Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {c14, estate1, copper1}
  --Play revealed c14
    ---Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
    ---Play c14 from your hand
      ----Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----[No more c14 in hand or revealed]
      ----Discard revealed cards: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----Trash a card from your hand
      ----Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
    ---[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
    ---Trash a card from your hand
    ---Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
  --[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
  --Trash a card from your hand
  --Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card

This is how it's worded, I think. It's weird. People will get confused as to which cards are revealed/on top of deck/have to be discarded.

Don't have any opinion on the third.

you got it right (or at least, that's as I wanted it to work). as I said in the op, it's a new attempt at a card that counts itself. play one, it's a terminal upgrade. play two, both are remodels, but you only need one action. play three, and you have three expands. it is complicated though.

Second one seems like a quarry variant. I don't know if it's that interesting. You don't get to combo it with "gain up to" or extra buys, but you can use it to buy real gold...

yea, it's a quarry variant (maybe I should've included the comments from the OP). The differences are
-> the +buy
-> you can also buy treasure cards and duchies/colonies/first province
-> you can't go back to build later in the game
-> it doesn't explode with more buys

I think the stack is too crazy for Dominion. If you could find a way to make the card playing last, that might be OK. Like, "+1 Card. You may gain a card costing up to $2 per c14 you have in play. You may play a c14 from your hand." That's almost certainly not balanced, but you get the idea.

but then you have a 1 / 1-2 / 1-2-3 / 1-2-3-4 growth, not a 1 / 2-2 / 3-3-3 / 4-4-4-4, which kind of ruins the idea. I get your point though.

I think it'd be easier to say, "If no Provinces have been gained this game"

agreed

dunno about the +2$ thing though. I was trying to stay as close to the original cards as possible, and fools gold uses the if .... otherwise ... wording. It's not different, fools gold could also use your wording. I think the fact that it doesn't may on its own be enough of a reason not to do it... what do you think?

The reaction has high potential for looping.

I know. There is an alternative, which is to copy the reaction of holy ground and make it "if another Player's card is trashed, you may discard this. If you do, gain a Prayer... putting it into your hand." I decided against that because it a) takes more words b) takes longer (assuming no loop) and c) just didn't feel natural to me for some reason. I thought the looping was okay, but you're making a good point; it's more likely that it triggers during another Player's turn, and then it's bad if it starts to snowball. I was hoping for a cute interaction with knight attacks though, and that'll take much longer with the Prayer-variant. Hm...

Still, it seems pretty weak when compared to stuff like Steward and Trading Post.

well Trading post is 5$. I did compare it to steward, I thought it was okay because of the reaction. Using that to draw 2 cards is much stronger than using Steward for +2 cards (lab effect / moat effect). And it can do more cool things with expensive cards.

[ConMan]

c15 - Treasure - 4$
+1 buy
If there are no Provinces missing from the supply, this is worth 3$. Otherwise, it's worth 1$.

I think it'd be easier to say, "If no Provinces have been gained this game". The effect is usually the same, and ConMan parsed the current wording wrong already. Or I did. One of the two. Also, you don't need the "otherwise" clause.

c15 - Treasure - 4$
Worth $1.
+1 Buy.
If no Provinces have been gained this game, +$2.

Oh, blah. You're right, it's actually more like a *reverse* Trading Post. Which means that if you've bought a lot of these, you really don't want anyone gaining Provinces, which means you're going to try to slow down the end game, or switch it to a Duchy/Estate rush. Which is ... :S

[pacovf]

The first one works weirdly.

-Play c14
  --Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {c14, estate1, copper1}
  --Play revealed c14
    ---Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
    ---Play c14 from your hand
      ----Reveal 3 top cards from your deck: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----[No more c14 in hand or revealed]
      ----Discard revealed cards: {estate1, copper1, copper2}
      ----Trash a card from your hand
      ----Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
    ---[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
    ---Trash a card from your hand
    ---Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card
  --[Revealed cards are no longer on top of deck, can't discard them]
  --Trash a card from your hand
  --Gain card costing up to 3$ more than trashed card

This is how it's worded, I think. It's weird. People will get confused as to which cards are revealed/on top of deck/have to be discarded.

Don't have any opinion on the third.

you got it right (or at least, that's as I wanted it to work). as I said in the op, it's a new attempt at a card that counts itself. play one, it's a terminal upgrade. play two, both are remodels, but you only need one action. play three, and you have three expands. it is complicated though.

It's not the trashing and gaining that is confusing in my mind, it's the revealing and discarding. You are revealing the same cards all the time, because the cards on top of your deck stay the same (unless you play a c14 from them). This is not intuitive.

I would suggest to change it to "Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Put a revealed c14 in your hand, discard the other cards. You may play a c14 from your hand. [...]". It's slightly stronger, and works more intuitively.

[silverspawn]

It's not the trashing and gaining that is confusing in my mind, it's the revealing and discarding. You are revealing the same cards all the time, because the cards on top of your deck stay the same

oh, now I get it. I was assuming that you reveal 3 new ones every time, but you're right, there is no reason too.

I would suggest to change it to "Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Put a revealed c14 in your hand, discard the other cards. You may play a c14 from your hand. [...]"

yes, that's much better.