Print

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

[GendoIkari]

+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
At the start of each turn for the rest of the game, +$1.
(This stays in play)
-------------------------------------------
At the end of your turn, if you did not buy any cards this turn, you may discard this.

EDIT: This is not supposed to be Treasury.

What is it supposed to be? A super-strong Treasury variant? This seems like it would be interesting, but probably needs to be in the bad card ideas thread... I mean, once you've discarded it, you need to remember to track that it was played. It would lead to an interesting mechanic of trying to decide how many times to play it and not buy anything to discard it before you just start buying every turn.

[Jimmmmm]

+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
At the start of each turn for the rest of the game, +$1.
(This stays in play)
-------------------------------------------
At the end of your turn, if you did not buy any cards this turn, you may discard this.

EDIT: This is not supposed to be Treasury.

What is it supposed to be? A super-strong Treasury variant? This seems like it would be interesting, but probably needs to be in the bad card ideas thread... I mean, once you've discarded it, you need to remember to track that it was played. It would lead to an interesting mechanic of trying to decide how many times to play it and not buy anything to discard it before you just start buying every turn.

Yeah I guess it's a bad ideas type card, but this is where I got the idea from. I feel like something like this would be fairly interesting if you can make it work tracking-wise.

[Asper]

If you wanted to remake Treasury, here's what i'd do:

Treasury, $4, Treasure - Duration
Worth 1$ each turn this is in play.
(Only discard this from play at the end of your turn if you bought a Victory card).

I don't know Donald's opinion on this, but given the name and how similarly it behaves, i am pretty sure this is the basic concept of Treasury anyhow (at least i was sure enough to state it whenever the topic of Duration-Treasures appeared). But hey, i was also sure Altar was a pun on alter, and i've been dead wrong with that one.

This seems quite overpowered. I mean, it's better than Treasury in almost every way, plus it costs $4 instead of $5. The only way in which Treasury is strong is that the turn you play this, you get 1 less card.

Also, the wording is very awkward. First off, saying that it is "worth $1 each turn", while not too hard to figure out what the intent is, doesn't really work in Dominion rules. It doesn't matter what a Treasure is worth unless you play that Treasure. It needs to give you $1 to spend each turn. And then it needs to specify when you get that (at the start of your turn, at the start of your buy phase, etc). Because of Black Market and Storyteller. And then the discard condition is wonky. A parenthetical phrase is usually a reminder or an additional piece of information about something you need to do; not the main instruction of how the card should be discarded. There's no reason for it to be a Duration at all if it's just going to state on it that it doesn't get discarded as normal.

Meh. Things work in Dominion rules if you say they do. Duration-Attacks were out of the question, suddenly they are there. There wasn't "paying" coins in your action phase, suddenly there is. I have to dig out the old thread where i suggested Swamp Hag and post the reactions when i have some time. Edit: Obviously i never posted the basic concept here, just the second version that used Embargo Tokens to avoid rules issues.

Also, how is it stronger than Treasury? Because it isn't vulnerable to attacks, maybe? I admit the price was an afterthought (because it doesn't draw cards), but i don't see how a replacement has to deal with "strictly better", at all. And by the way, i definitely think real Treasury is the better designed card, so i'm not really intending to find a replacement. I guess i kind of said that, though. Oops.

I'm mostly curious whether Donald would have done Treasury differently if he had known he would do the things with Durations he is doing today. Because i feel the old Seaside cards managed to do a lot of interesting stuff while still being incredibly simple. Treasury has been a specifically good excample of this.

[LastFootnote]

For Treasury to be a Duration card, it would have to say this:

Treasury: Action - Duration, $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
Now and at the start of each of your turns until you buy a Victory card: +$1.

None of this "Discard this from play" shenanigans. Removing Duration cards from play does not stop them from doing their thing. They do things until they're done doing things, and then they get discarded at the end of that turn.

[GendoIkari]

If you wanted to remake Treasury, here's what i'd do:

Treasury, $4, Treasure - Duration
Worth 1$ each turn this is in play.
(Only discard this from play at the end of your turn if you bought a Victory card).

I don't know Donald's opinion on this, but given the name and how similarly it behaves, i am pretty sure this is the basic concept of Treasury anyhow (at least i was sure enough to state it whenever the topic of Duration-Treasures appeared). But hey, i was also sure Altar was a pun on alter, and i've been dead wrong with that one.

This seems quite overpowered. I mean, it's better than Treasury in almost every way, plus it costs $4 instead of $5. The only way in which Treasury is strong is that the turn you play this, you get 1 less card.

Also, the wording is very awkward. First off, saying that it is "worth $1 each turn", while not too hard to figure out what the intent is, doesn't really work in Dominion rules. It doesn't matter what a Treasure is worth unless you play that Treasure. It needs to give you $1 to spend each turn. And then it needs to specify when you get that (at the start of your turn, at the start of your buy phase, etc). Because of Black Market and Storyteller. And then the discard condition is wonky. A parenthetical phrase is usually a reminder or an additional piece of information about something you need to do; not the main instruction of how the card should be discarded. There's no reason for it to be a Duration at all if it's just going to state on it that it doesn't get discarded as normal.

Also, how is it stronger than Treasury? Because it isn't vulnerable to attacks, maybe? I admit the price was an afterthought (because it doesn't draw cards), but i don't see how a replacement has to deal with "strictly better", at all. And by the way, i definitely think real Treasury is the better designed card, so i'm not really intending to find a replacement. I guess i kind of said that, though. Oops.

Mostly because it's a treasure instead of an action. That means it can't be drawn dead. Sure it also means that you can't use TR/KC, but as a general rule, treasure is stronger than non-terminal money. And because it isn't vulnerable to attacks. Of course this especially applies to Minion, but any discarding attack is harsher with Treasuries in hand. And if you have other reaction cards in your deck, Treasury being in your hand is bad when any attacks are played.

[GendoIkari]

For Treasury to be a Duration card, it would have to say this:

Treasury: Action - Duration, $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
Now and at the start of each of your turns until you buy a Victory card: +$1.

None of this "Discard this from play" shenanigans. Removing Duration cards from play does not stop them from doing their thing. They do things until they're done doing things, and then they get discarded at the end of that turn.

Yes. Clean, simple, actually uses the rules of duration cards.

[Donald X.]

I'm mostly curious whether Donald would have done Treasury differently if he had known he would do the things with Durations he is doing today. Because i feel the old Seaside cards managed to do a lot of interesting stuff while still being incredibly simple. Treasury has been a specifically good excample of this.

For sure I would do some things differently in the earlier expansions; there is a long post about that in the archive. You get better as you go along.

For Seaside I was still interacting with Valerie and Dale. Valerie in particular did not like Duration cards. So the push was to limit how many there were, not come up with more things for them to do. In fact Haven was out of the set for a while, and made it back in very late when it turned out there was room for a 26th card (and that was a fine card that had been tested; Valerie had felt it was too similar to Caravan).

There was an attack that hit other players' turns (Tax Collector, made cards cost $1 more), that left (well turned into Cutpurse) because it would have left play at a different time from other Duration cards, (end of the prev. player's turn) and Valerie didn't like that. Late in the going I realized I could save Lighthouse by having it produce resources on your next turn, and of course that same solution could have been used for attacks; but Tax Collector had already turned into Cutpurse and again there was anti-demand for new Duration cards.

[Asper]

I'm mostly curious whether Donald would have done Treasury differently if he had known he would do the things with Durations he is doing today. Because i feel the old Seaside cards managed to do a lot of interesting stuff while still being incredibly simple. Treasury has been a specifically good excample of this.

For Seaside I was still interacting with Valerie and Dale. Valerie in particular did not like Duration cards. So the push was to limit how many there were, not come up with more things for them to do. In fact Haven was out of the set for a while, and made it back in very late when it turned out there was room for a 26th card (and that was a fine card that had been tested; Valerie had felt it was too similar to Caravan).

Wow, that's a very interesting insight. I kind of always assumed you intentionally did Treasury, Ghost Ship etc. this way to make them work without the duration mechanic. The fact that external forces were the main cause makes me see the return of Durations in a whole new light. Thanks
For what it's worth, Haven is my favourite Seaside-Duration. I love how it is small, but helps setting up more relevant pieces.

[crlundy]

Late in the going I realized I could save Lighthouse by having it produce resources on your next turn, and of course that same solution could have been used for attacks; but Tax Collector had already turned into Cutpurse and again there was anti-demand for new Duration cards.

I know there's been discussion before as to why Duration-Attacks wouldn't work. But is this why there weren't any in Seaside? I always assumed Reactions to Attacks had been the culprit.

[Donald X.]

Late in the going I realized I could save Lighthouse by having it produce resources on your next turn, and of course that same solution could have been used for attacks; but Tax Collector had already turned into Cutpurse and again there was anti-demand for new Duration cards.

I know there's been discussion before as to why Duration-Attacks wouldn't work. But is this why there weren't any in Seaside? I always assumed Reactions to Attacks had been the culprit.

I don't really have more story here. There was one Duration-Attack, it changed for the reason I said. There was a push against new Duration cards so I didn't make new Duration-Attacks. I don't remember Moat coming up as a complaint there and searching old emails is beyond the scope for me. When I revisited Durations, I did Attacks, look at that. Swamp Hag was one of the first cards into the set.

[crlundy]

Cool. No complaints here.