Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Two random ideas  (Read 3187 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Tombolo

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 439
  • Respect: +450
    • View Profile
Two random ideas
« on: September 08, 2014, 09:16:18 pm »
0

Missionary
$4 Action-Attack

+$2
Each opponent with five or more cards in hand trashes a card from their hand.

(I had a few more complicated ideas for balance purposes, but I think keeping it simple works fine.  I think the possibility of helping your opponent and the fact that it's a $4 terminal silver offsets the potential power, and I can't see an easy way to pin with it either.)


Weapons Dealer
$4 Action-Reaction

Gain a card costing up to $4.  Put it on the bottom of your deck.
--
When an attack affects you, you may reveal this from your hand and discard it.  If you do, gain a copy of that attack.

(I think gaining to the bottom is a cute little gimmick, and makes it just good enough that you could conceivably buy it on some attack-less boards.  I can't decide how strong the reaction is, but I feel like it would at least be interesting.)
Logged
We’ve had a hard day at work, we’ve been looking forward to our Dominion, how can you expect us to play anything else, you ogre.

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 992
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +690
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #1 on: September 08, 2014, 11:38:48 pm »
0

Missionary
$4 Action-Attack

+$2
Each opponent with five or more cards in hand trashes a card from their hand.

(I had a few more complicated ideas for balance purposes, but I think keeping it simple works fine.  I think the possibility of helping your opponent and the fact that it's a $4 terminal silver offsets the potential power, and I can't see an easy way to pin with it either.)
I'm not sure I'd ever buy this as-is. Possibly in the late game, but only if the top part focused more on the end game than the early game. The name is really thematic, which is cool.

Quote
Weapons Dealer
$4 Action-Reaction

Gain a card costing up to $4.  Put it on the bottom of your deck.
--
When an attack affects you, you may reveal this from your hand and discard it.  If you do, gain a copy of that attack.

(I think gaining to the bottom is a cute little gimmick, and makes it just good enough that you could conceivably buy it on some attack-less boards.  I can't decide how strong the reaction is, but I feel like it would at least be interesting.)
Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory. I'd take off the top part, replace it with an attack, and, if you want to, you could put that "bottom of your deck" onto the Reaction so that it'll read "If you do, gain a copy of that attack, putting it onto the bottom of your deck".

Wow. That last sentence had a lot of commas.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #2 on: September 09, 2014, 12:11:23 am »
0

Trashing attacks like that have an inherent problem of being either too weak or too strong in a way that doesn't balance out.  This one will typically be on the weak side, going so far as to be beneficial to opponents.  It's pretty much Bishop in that regard.  But if the kingdom already has strong trashing, this not only forces opponents to trash a good card but also cause acts as a discard attack.

Note how the only trashing attacks in the game (Swindler, Saboteur, Rogue and Knights) all attack the deck rather than the hand, and they all have effects that make the attack stronger while preventing it from being too crazy.  The first two give the other players a replacement card while the latter two have a max cost and small search space.  Swindler hurts a lot when it trashes Copper and is only a small help when it hits Estate.  The latter three all have minimum costs so that they don't help opponents trash junk.


Quote
Weapons Dealer
$4 Action-Reaction

Gain a card costing up to $4.  Put it on the bottom of your deck.
--
When an attack affects you, you may reveal this from your hand and discard it.  If you do, gain a copy of that attack.

(I think gaining to the bottom is a cute little gimmick, and makes it just good enough that you could conceivably buy it on some attack-less boards.  I can't decide how strong the reaction is, but I feel like it would at least be interesting.)
Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory. I'd take off the top part, replace it with an attack, and, if you want to, you could put that "bottom of your deck" onto the Reaction so that it'll read "If you do, gain a copy of that attack, putting it onto the bottom of your deck".

Wow. That last sentence had a lot of commas.

Sure they can work.  Most reactions fall into this category, and there's also Conspirator and Peddler which really need +action cards.



My criticism of Weapons Dealer is that the top is boring.  I'm biased against Workshop variants in general, just from personal preference.  The reaction could be interesting, but I'm not sure why it says "when an attack affects you" rather than the standard, "when another player plays an Attack card".  With the current wording, it makes the reaction much weaker against discard attacks because the discard attack will affect you first before you can use the reaction, meaning you will end up with a 2 card hand (or 3 cards vs. Urchin).
« Last Edit: September 09, 2014, 12:13:24 am by eHalcyon »
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11815
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12868
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #3 on: September 09, 2014, 01:22:58 am »
0

Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory.
You could say the same about Moat and Courtyard.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5318
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2014, 08:59:03 am »
0

Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory.
You could say the same about Moat and Courtyard.
you can't though. moat can be useful without attacks, and what do you even mean with courtyard? courtyard is one of the best BM enablers.

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11815
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12868
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2014, 09:38:45 am »
0

Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory.
You could say the same about Moat and Courtyard.
you can't though. moat can be useful without attacks, and what do you even mean with courtyard? courtyard is one of the best BM enablers.
Moat is pretty similar to Courtyard and relies on other type of cards being in the game without bringing that type of card into the game.
Logged
Bomb, Cannon, and many of the Gunpowder cards can strongly effect gameplay, particularly in a destructive way

The YouTube channel where I make musicDownload my band's Creative Commons albums for free

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1380
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2014, 09:54:45 am »
0

Cards that rely on other type of cards being in the game but don't bring that type of card into the game (through pulling in a separate pile or being that type themselves) are something I don't think can work. I do like the "put on the bottom of your deck" thing, but as is this card is pretty similar to Armory.
You could say the same about Moat and Courtyard.
you can't though. moat can be useful without attacks, and what do you even mean with courtyard? courtyard is one of the best BM enablers.
Moat is pretty similar to Courtyard and relies on other type of cards being in the game without bringing that type of card into the game.

Yeah, Courtyard is arbitrarily (almost) better than moat unless there are attacks on the board. It's ok to reference a type of card that may not be in the game in a reaction portion of a card, since the top part can still be used. However, gaining to bottom and simply gaining are really similar, since the only difference it makes is it nullifies the chance that the card misses the next shuffles. Or you draw exactly your deck and in that case you get it a shuffle sooner, but meh that's pretty edge case-y.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5318
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #7 on: September 09, 2014, 10:36:42 am »
0

I misunderstood your post. you're right.

about the cards, weapons dealer looks fine, missionary doesn't. terminal silver with a penalty that is sometimes a strong attack is not a good concept.

theblankman

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 461
  • Respect: +383
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #8 on: September 09, 2014, 08:25:35 pm »
0

Weapons dealer would be interesting paired with Urchin (alternate way to gain Merc).  Missionary might be better if it specified card cost.  Each opponent with 5 or more cards in hand trashes a card costing $3-6 from their hand?  Variation on the Knight attack, plus a slight hand-size reduction.  I think that version would have to cost $5 though. 
Logged
it's a shame that full-random is the de facto standard

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5318
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3224
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #9 on: September 09, 2014, 08:36:47 pm »
+2

Quote
5 or more cards in hand trashes a card costing $3-6 from their hand? 

like this?

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10722
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #10 on: September 09, 2014, 09:54:32 pm »
+2

Quote
5 or more cards in hand trashes a card costing $3-6 from their hand? 

like this?

No, that's more like this. ;)
Logged

soulnet

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2142
  • Respect: +1751
    • View Profile
Re: Two random ideas
« Reply #11 on: September 10, 2014, 10:51:55 am »
+1

I think it is worth to make the other players draw 1 before trashing. Having more cards to choose from makes the Attack weaker, but of course it makes it stackable. However, it makes the Attack not be a discard Attack at all, thus making it more comparable to the existing trash-from-deck Attack, but with the added selecting-from-hand interaction.
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.116 seconds with 20 queries.