Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2  All

Author Topic: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?  (Read 9207 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« on: April 09, 2015, 01:15:36 am »
+1

Spin-off from this thread.

It is a precedent for specifying who chooses, but (in my opinion?) it is specifying because it is going against the default of the player gaining the card choosing.

Certainly.  I am just saying that I think the hurdles are less significant.

It's very possible he did.  It definitely doesn't feel like it fits well in Dominion, but don't think fan cards always have to fit inside the mold. There was also a time when $7 cards were seen as outside the realm of Dominion.  I think it would be pretty easy to define the rules for how a Curse type card would work. I think the real challenge would be coming up with a Curse type card that is any good.



I meant to mention in my last post that throwing off the balance of Cursing cards doesn't really seem like an issue at all to me.  Isn't throwing off the balance of other cards kind of what the most interesting Dominion cards do?  Do strong trashers not throw off the balance of Cursing cards already?


My point is that many of these things are ambiguous and don't follow from established rules.  A $7 card doesn't create any ambiguity at all.  The way Moat interacts with Duration attacks can be confusing to casual players, but it follows directly from a proper reading of established rules.  New Curses would, however, require new rulings that contradict previous rules.  The better way to introduce new Curses is to not use the Curse typing at all... like Ruins.

Fan cards don't have to fit into the "Dominion mold", but that is how we judge them.  You could also use this defense for targeted attacks, but people will criticize such fan cards and rightly so.

Throwing off the balance of Curses is dangerous because it directly impacts a whole bunch of separate cards at once.  It could be like saying all VP cards are now worth 2 extra VP, or all Reactions are now non-terminal, or all gainers now gain to your hand, or all cards that draw now draw one less.  This kind of balance change is not an interaction between cards, like strong trashing vs. Cursing cards.  it's a shift of an entire class of cards.  With one individual trashing card, you can adjust its effects or cost as needed to achieve balance.  But here we already have a bunch of set cards. 

Again, it's not impossible.  But man, this is a whole lot of mess for not very much gain.  If you make the new Curse such that you maintain some semblance of balance, it's probably not going to be different enough from old Curse to be any interesting.


Someone has been reading the Secret Histories again, hasn't he?

The real easy option is that you could make a new "Curse" and just use those instead of the -1VP "Curse" that came with the game. Now nothing changes. (This would not allow multiple piles of Curses though.)

No, it's been a while since I've read them.  If I had read them recently, I'd be able to bring up a direct quote.  I think replacing Curses with new Curses is either going to be a balancing mess or relatively uninteresting, especially since you'd need them to be different from both Curses and Ruins.
Logged

GreyICE

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2015, 01:19:13 am »
0

Curse of Envy
Curse - Reaction
Worth -1 VP for each 3 Curse cards in your deck

If you would gain a Curse and Curse of Envy is in the supply, you may gain a Curse of Envy instead. 
------
If you would gain a Curse, you may instead reveal and discard this.  Each other player gains a Curse

Curse of Greed
Curse - Treasure
-1 VP
At end of game if your deck has the most copies of Curse of Greed, another -1 VP
$2
If you would gain a curse and Curse of Greed is in the supply, you may gain a Curse of Greed instead. 
------
When you play this, gain a Curse of Greed


Part of a cycle of the 7 deadly sins.  Wrath would be an attack, etc.

I actually really like this idea.  The idea would be to add the "Sins" to the randomizer, like event cards, but like event cards they don't count as Kingdom cards and don't have a stack.  My expectation is that people would add them as needed.  Would make cursing attacks more interesting, to be sure (they're often the strongest cards at their cost, so I'm not worried about over-weakening them)
« Last Edit: April 09, 2015, 02:18:22 am by GreyICE »
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1691
  • Respect: +1162
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2015, 01:22:58 am »
0

Of course it's uninteresting. Why do that when you can do something else just as easily? (i.e. Ruins)

Although, if you did want to change what happens to cursing attacks, then replacing "Curse" with "Curse v2" is the easiest way to do that. There are already rules in place for "Curse" and already cards that interact with "Curse" cards.

How interesting would Mountebank be if suddenly it gave a "Ruins and a Copper" instead? Not very. But would you want to have Mountebank Curse and Mountebank Ruins on the same board? Probably not. So instead of having all new Attack cards use an all new Curse method, go ahead and change all your Curses to Curse v2 without worrying about overlapping cards and new rules. AKA, the easy way to make a new "Curse"

Also, the secret histories comment seemed to cause some confusion as I was simply pointing out the other "junk" card Donald had tested.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

GreyICE

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 43
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #3 on: April 09, 2015, 02:19:05 am »
0

Well that's why I thought of the "7 vices" curses.  It would be cool design space if instead of gaining a curse you gain something that might be better or worse than a curse.

Greed is a silver that drains your victory points every time you use it for money.   If you're the greediest, you're punished.  But they are much better than a curse, right? 
Envy is a curse that might protect you.  You better hope, because it might be very negative.

I think there's some design space for curses that aren't vanilla curses, and co-exist.  But maybe it's unneeded complexity.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2015, 02:20:06 am by GreyICE »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #4 on: April 09, 2015, 04:52:33 am »
+1

Not much time to reply, but i'd like to point out that replacing Curses is not more "contradictory" to standard setup than replacing starting Estates. You could argue they throw off the balance towards engines, too. Or that Colony makes long building too strong.
Logged

pedroluchini

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
  • Respect: +205
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #5 on: April 09, 2015, 08:37:31 am »
+2

I don't understand the argument that says "these special Curses affect the balance of existing Attacks, so we shouldn't do special Curses."

How is that any different from Ruins, which affect the balance of a lot of cards (Vineyards, Fairgrounds, Golem, to name a few)?
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #6 on: April 09, 2015, 09:04:50 am »
+3

I don't understand the argument that says "these special Curses affect the balance of existing Attacks, so we shouldn't do special Curses."

How is that any different from Ruins, which affect the balance of a lot of cards (Vineyards, Fairgrounds, Golem, to name a few)?

Because that's ALL they do. Anything at all that you want to accomplish with a new "Curse" type card can be done just as easily without giving it the type "Curse". The only thing at all that having "Curse" be the type is to change the way those existing cards work. And while Ruins may have affected the balance of certain cards, they didn't change how those cards actually work. What you do when you use those cards is still exactly the same. A new Curse card wouldn't just change the balance of certain cards, it would change the actual effect of resolving those cards.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5477
  • Respect: +2860
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #7 on: April 09, 2015, 01:04:09 pm »
0

I actually think most of the official cursers are poorly designed (too strong) and have little interest in custom Curses the way most people have little interest in custom Prizes for that reason.
Logged

theblankman

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 461
  • Respect: +383
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #8 on: April 09, 2015, 02:01:17 pm »
+2

If you think existing cursers are too strong, you could make custom curses that weaken them.  See this thread: http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=12737.0  It's not really about curses, it's about a hot-potato card, but we briefly touch on the idea of giving it the curse type so that its presence makes cursers potentially give you a useful card instead of junk.  Just keep in mind that what you're doing is affecting existing attacks on purpose. 
Logged
it's a shame that full-random is the de facto standard

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #9 on: April 09, 2015, 02:36:47 pm »
0

Not much time to reply, but i'd like to point out that replacing Curses is not more "contradictory" to standard setup than replacing starting Estates. You could argue they throw off the balance towards engines, too. Or that Colony makes long building too strong.

I disagree.  Shelters vs. starting Estates is a much smaller part of the setup and does not directly impact nearly as many cards as replacing Curses would, nor to the same extent.  With Shelters, cards still resolve like they did before, vs. a large number of attacks that would be resolved differently with new Curses.  Estates are still in the game.  And Shelters have their own type (compare: Ruins).  You could make a new Curse that has only a mild impact, but the opportunity cost (re: production, not in-game) is much greater with new Curses because you'll be asking for 50 cards.  And then it's not interesting.  With a bigger change, it's liable to be a balancing nightmare for all the existing Cursers.

Colony is an addition, not a replacement.

I don't understand the argument that says "these special Curses affect the balance of existing Attacks, so we shouldn't do special Curses."

How is that any different from Ruins, which affect the balance of a lot of cards (Vineyards, Fairgrounds, Golem, to name a few)?

Gendo already answered this.  I reiterate that a new Curse doesn't have to be ruled out entirely.  I'm only saying that it's probably a bad idea because it creates a lot of problems for very little addition to the game.  To maintain a reasonable level of balance for all the existing Curse attacks, the new Curses probably won't be very interesting.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #10 on: April 09, 2015, 02:55:10 pm »
0

I can understand opportunity cost as a reason not to produce alt-Curses for real Dominion. I'd also rather have five new cards than one (assuming you want to replace the entire pile). That said, i think this doesn't matter for fan cards.

If you do a Curse card and it's not an interesting card outside of Curser games, it'd better not be a kingdom card. If it is, you get away with less copies, but the effect has to be bigger, which is likely to make them too attractive for a "Curse". That still leaves the base option open, though, and all i can think of that speaks against a cantrip or "return this to the supply" curse is that they take away an awful amount of space. Still, your space isn't my concern. I totally don't mind Cursers being a bit weaker every so often. And for a Curse that returns itself, i'm not even sure a never-ending Curse pile "weakens" cursers. After all, most cursers have certain things in common: They cost $5, rarely $4, are terminal and powerful. You can balance your alt-Curse around that.

I think you are right for kingdom Curses, though. But i really wouldn't mind a pseudo-event saying "Use Cusses this game". As long as i ddon't have to spend my own money on those cards...
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1691
  • Respect: +1162
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #11 on: April 09, 2015, 03:36:30 pm »
+2

Never-Ending Curse
$0
-2VP
-----
When you discard or trash this, return it to the Never-Ending Curse pile
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #12 on: April 09, 2015, 04:18:24 pm »
0

Never-Ending Curse
$0
-2VP
-----
When you discard or trash this, return it to the Never-Ending Curse pile

Funny how yours is even meaner than normal Curse. I was thinking of

Curse Lite, Action-Curse, 0$
Return this to the supply
----
-1VP
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #13 on: April 09, 2015, 05:38:38 pm »
+1

As a Kingdom card:

Quote
Drought: Action-Curse, 0$
+3 buys. Return this to the Supply.

-2 VP

The Supply contains four of them per player after the first (i.e., 40% as many as regular Curses). Not a super clean solution, but I think this is how it would work best (the "four" can be tweaked).

Now it does something even if there are no cursers in the game, while making cursing games sharper: there are more curses to distribute, but you can slow down the influx, at least at first.

It might not be perfect, but I am sure there are other ways to do this.

Never-Ending Curse
$0
-2VP
-----
When you discard or trash this, return it to the Never-Ending Curse pile

Funny how yours is even meaner than normal Curse.

Not really, you only draw them once before returning them to the Supply, so there will be less of them clogging your deck.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2015, 05:40:24 pm by pacovf »
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #14 on: April 09, 2015, 05:54:10 pm »
0

As a Kingdom card:

Quote
Drought: Action-Curse, 0$
+3 buys. Return this to the Supply.

-2 VP

The Supply contains four of them per player after the first (i.e., 40% as many as regular Curses). Not a super clean solution, but I think this is how it would work best (the "four" can be tweaked).

Now it does something even if there are no cursers in the game, while making cursing games sharper: there are more curses to distribute, but you can slow down the influx, at least at first.

It might not be perfect, but I am sure there are other ways to do this.

Never-Ending Curse
$0
-2VP
-----
When you discard or trash this, return it to the Never-Ending Curse pile

Funny how yours is even meaner than normal Curse.

Not really, you only draw them once before returning them to the Supply, so there will be less of them clogging your deck.

Oops, you're right. I somehow totally read over the discard clause...  :-[
Logged

pacovf

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3499
  • Multiediting poster
  • Respect: +3838
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #15 on: April 09, 2015, 06:18:13 pm »
0

Another option, instead of replacing Curses with versions you can handle but that have a stronger VP penalty, is to make them harsher but VP neutral. For example:

Quote
Vermin: Curse, $0
In games using this, reveal your hand at the start of your Clean-up phase. If you revealed any Curse, gain a Vermin.

Quote
Stench: Curse, $0
In games using this, at the start of your turn, reveal your hand. If you revealed any Curse, discard a non-Curse card.

Not sure if meaner curses are all that interesting, but really, the sky's the limit!
Logged
pacovf has a neopets account.  It has 999 hours logged.  All his neopets are named "Jessica".  I guess that must be his ex.

Kirian

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7096
  • Shuffle iT Username: Kirian
  • An Unbalanced Equation
  • Respect: +9411
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #16 on: April 09, 2015, 06:27:54 pm »
+1

Never-Ending Curse
$0
-2VP
-----
When you discard or trash this, return it to the Never-Ending Curse pile

With the discard clause this is basically "opponent draws a worse hand in the next shuffle.". I think this could be done better with an attack that says "Each other player puts their -1 Card token on top of their deck."

And now that I've written that out, I really hope that's an attack that exists in the set.
Logged
Kirian's Law of f.DS jokes:  Any sufficiently unexplained joke is indistinguishable from serious conversation.

Jimmmmm

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1762
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jimmmmm
  • Respect: +2017
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #17 on: April 09, 2015, 06:45:07 pm »
+2

What about Curses which have come with built-in ways to get rid of them? Eg each one is worth, say -3 VP, and each has a different reaction along the lines of:

"At the start of your Clean-Up Phase, if you didn't buy any cards this turn, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash this."

"When you gain a Gold, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash this and the gained Gold."

"When you buy an Estate, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash this."
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1795
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • I wish my username had the links like it once did.
  • Respect: +1674
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #18 on: April 09, 2015, 07:39:15 pm »
+4

I always wondered why curses have their own type in the first place. I thought they should be victory cards that happen to have negative victory points on them.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #19 on: April 09, 2015, 07:53:11 pm »
0

I always wondered why curses have their own type in the first place. I thought they should be victory cards that happen to have negative victory points on them.

I'm guessing that this is mostly because people want to think of victory cards as "things that give you points." There were plenty of complaints when overgrown estate was created because it doesn't give points.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Flip5ide

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 274
  • Highest Rank/Rating: 58/5600
  • Respect: +136
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #20 on: April 09, 2015, 07:59:53 pm »
0

Spin-off from this thread.

Thought you were going to link to this thread instead.
Logged
"If at first you don't succeed, find out if the loser gets anything." - William Lyon Phelps

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #21 on: April 09, 2015, 08:09:42 pm »
0

I always wondered why curses have their own type in the first place. I thought they should be victory cards that happen to have negative victory points on them.

From the Secret Histories:

Quote
It isn't a Victory card because that would cause some poor card interactions eventually.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1795
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • I wish my username had the links like it once did.
  • Respect: +1674
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #22 on: April 09, 2015, 08:49:30 pm »
0

I always wondered why curses have their own type in the first place. I thought they should be victory cards that happen to have negative victory points on them.

From the Secret Histories:
Quote
It isn't a Victory card because that would cause some poor card interactions eventually.

That's vague. I wonder what bad card interactions he was thinking of.  It would make a few cards slightly stronger (Ironmonger, Scout, Tribute, Transmute, etc.). I guess in general it would just make curses slightly less harmful, but that doesn't seem so bad. The only one I can think of that I would consider a bad interaction would be Transmute. 

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #23 on: April 09, 2015, 08:56:44 pm »
0

I always wondered why curses have their own type in the first place. I thought they should be victory cards that happen to have negative victory points on them.

From the Secret Histories:
Quote
It isn't a Victory card because that would cause some poor card interactions eventually.

That's vague. I wonder what bad card interactions he was thinking of.  It would make a few cards slightly stronger (Ironmonger, Scout, Tribute, Transmute, etc.). I guess in general it would just make curses slightly less harmful, but that doesn't seem so bad. The only one I can think of that I would consider a bad interaction would be Transmute.

I think Bureaucrat and Silk Roads would be bad interactions too.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1795
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • I wish my username had the links like it once did.
  • Respect: +1674
    • View Profile
Re: Is it a bad idea to make new Curse-type cards?
« Reply #24 on: April 09, 2015, 09:26:24 pm »
0

Silk Roads yes, Bureaucrat, no.  But Silk roads is enough to convince me.
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.375 seconds with 20 queries.