Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.  (Read 9766 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
+1

So, I recently bought RL Alchemy and I love it! But I think its worst weakness is that there are too few interesting and fun Potion cards (I play full random) - and in particular too few potion cards actually care about potions, or would be any different without them. Since I have a few spare, proxiable cards, I thought of making another fan card for my physical set (after Holy Cow, which I still use handdrawn proxies for, and needs work).
I have thought about this:

Druid - Action
Cost: 4$ OR 2P
Trash two cards from your hand.
If you Trashed two Potions this way, Gain as many Golds as there are Potions in the Trash.
Every player (including you) Gains a Potion.

I also made tentative card art (in Italian):


Before printing, I'd like opinions (as usual) about:
- is it awfully, blatantly broken? (awfully, subtly broken is appreciated as well)
- does it look fun?
- is cost ok?
- will it scale ok?
- Is gaining craploads of Gold broken? My thought is that it's harder to pull off than Treasure Maps, and the payback is lower unless you do some setup.
- I'm also considering making trashing optional, to make it more Golem-friendly.

The reason for the double cost is that you avoid having to specify that "in games with this, Potion is in the supply".
If somebody could also point me to fan cards that care about Potions, I'd appreciate that. :)
« Last Edit: May 29, 2015, 10:17:12 am by Accatitippi »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
+1

Just a quick comment to say that I think the idea of having 2 possible costs is a really neat idea. Though I think that even with the Potion-junking, it will end up being very rare that you'll pay for it with Potions. Maybe a cost of 1P is enough.

Oh, and Potion-junking will scale bad with multiple players. There's 12 Potions I believe, which in a 2 player game is fine, but with 4 players, Potions will run out after 1 person hands out only 3 Potions to each player.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2015, 11:07:27 am by GendoIkari »
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

Burning Skull

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1150
  • Shuffle iT Username: Burning Skull
  • See you in the Outpost
  • Respect: +1843
    • View Profile
0

It seems the card is awfully, completely broken, but the art is pretty cool on the other hand, and overall concept is fresh and unusual :)

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1323
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1379
    • View Profile
+2

What happens if I play Highway and then Apprentice, trashing Druid? Do I draw 3 cards or 4?
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

Evidence of thriving towns, Pottery, roads, and a centralized government amaze the startled scientists.

Finally, they come upon a stone tablet, which contains but one mysterious phrase!

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
0

What happens if I play Highway and then Apprentice, trashing Druid? Do I draw 3 cards or 4?

Yes, I think the alternate cost needs to be spelled out on the card instead. "When you buy this, you may pay PP instead of its cost."
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
+4

What happens if I play Highway and then Apprentice, trashing Druid? Do I draw 3 cards or 4?

5.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
+1

What happens if I play Highway and then Apprentice, trashing Druid? Do I draw 3 cards or 4?

5.

Yeah this seems clear to me. +1 card per coin it costs; it costs 3 coins, so 3 cards.
+2 cards if it has potion in the cost; it has potion in the cost so +2 cards.
Total 5 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

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
0

What happens if I play Highway and then Apprentice, trashing Druid? Do I draw 3 cards or 4?

5.

Yeah this seems clear to me. +1 card per coin it costs; it costs 3 coins, so 3 cards.
+2 cards if it has potion in the cost; it has potion in the cost so +2 cards.
Total 5 cards.
Yes, I'd say 5 too.

Just a quick comment to say that I think the idea of having 2 possible costs is a really neat idea. Though I think that even with the Potion-junking, it will end up being very rare that you'll pay for it with Potions. Maybe a cost of 1P is enough.

Oh, and Potion-junking will scale bad with multiple players. There's 12 Potions I believe, which in a 2 player game is fine, but with 4 players, Potions will run out after 1 person hands out only 3 Potions to each player.
There are 16 Potions, actually (4 plays in 4p). My thought is that since it stops junking earlier it becomes a better trasher, since it gets to Squire level trashing earlier (leveling up from generally-worse-than-TradingPost).
I'd cost it 3$/1P without the gaining Gold part, but it felt cool to add it (just like the double cost) - testing will show if it is worth keeping.
I'm not sure about lowering the alt cost to 1P as I'm afraid that it could become too much of an advantage for the players suffering the junking, and frankly it's a pretty weak junker already. Maybe I should drop the double cost altogether, to recycle it on some other card :/

Thank you all for your feedback!

EDIT: I think it might be interesting to have it cost 5/1P or even 6/1P as that would give a fun choice as to what is the best plan to get it early. (and not just as a gift for the heavily Potioned)
« Last Edit: May 31, 2015, 06:59:29 pm by Accatitippi »
Logged

GeeJo

  • Coppersmith
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 47
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
0

Definitely interesting, but the total package is so weird that I can't really evaluate its relative power level. You're going to have to run some playtesting to find out, I think.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
0

This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.

Example

Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost
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

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #10 on: June 01, 2015, 03:06:20 pm »
0

This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.

Example

Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost

I'm not a fan of the overpay effect usually, but for some effects and without Potion costs, you could use that instead:

Some card - 4$+
Some effect worth a 5$.
----
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you don't, gain a Copper.


It gets much clunkier if you want a bigger gap:

Some card - 3$+
Some effect worth a 5$.
----
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. For each $ you overpay less then by $2, gain a Copper.


Just a thought.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #11 on: June 01, 2015, 03:24:43 pm »
0

Also i think you should not underestimate how important Potion is for Potion cards. Take your Druid, for example. $4 is something you can afford before your first reshuffle. PP is something you cannot afford before your third reshuffle. That's why i doubt people are going to pay PP for it, ever.

About the original Alchemy cards, they mostly use that cost to limit how early and how fast you can get them. Golem for example, has a cost that's harder to pay than $6: You could have bought a Silver instead of your Potion, and whenever you were able to buy Golem, you could have bought a $6 instead (had you gotten the Silver). Just that Potion, unlike Silver, can only be used to pay for a few cards, and will sometimes come at an unfortunate moment, when you'd rather have had a Silver, or Copper even. Also, you can't pay a Potion card by anything else, so you can only buy as many Potion cards per shuffle as you have Potions (bla bla, Counterfeit Herbalist edge cases...). In general, Potion's role is buying limitation, and other interactions are more of a side effect. I'd recommend making the Potion gain on buy, by the way.

For a card that i intentionally costed at a Potion, see my Homunculus here. Originally it costed $4 and set itself aside when bought, waiting for your next shuffle and being gained only then (the effect was just incredibly good, so i had to make it slower). Now you have to exchange a Potion for it, which does the same thing basically without being wonky. I also have another Potion cost card, but there it's more that it's a standard engine card where a Potion cost just striked me as fitting.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2015, 03:26:44 pm by Asper »
Logged

AJD

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3292
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +4434
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #12 on: June 01, 2015, 07:06:27 pm »
+2

Also i think you should not underestimate how important Potion is for Potion cards. Take your Druid, for example. $4 is something you can afford before your first reshuffle. PP is something you cannot afford before your third reshuffle. That's why i doubt people are going to pay PP for it, ever.

I believe the PP cost is there as a counter because it's a Potion junker—so if your opponent is using this and you've been junked up so bad that you draw a hand with two Potions and less than $4 in coin, you can still get a Druid.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2015, 12:27:59 am »
+3

This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.

Example

Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost

Not sure if intended, but as written, you still need $6 available in order to get this, even if you don't actually use up the $6.
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1153
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1795
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2015, 09:19:06 am »
0

Also i think you should not underestimate how important Potion is for Potion cards. Take your Druid, for example. $4 is something you can afford before your first reshuffle. PP is something you cannot afford before your third reshuffle. That's why i doubt people are going to pay PP for it, ever.

I believe the PP cost is there as a counter because it's a Potion junker—so if your opponent is using this and you've been junked up so bad that you draw a hand with two Potions and less than $4 in coin, you can still get a Druid.

Exactly - I wouldn't expect anybody to buy Potions for the purpose of getting a Druid.

I and my brother played 2 games using Druid, most notably both including Apothecary.
The first one was crazy (or should I write cwazy?) - Familiar was on the board, we both went for Druids (the only trashing available) - Gold ran out quite fast and my brother won being the one to fire his Druids last (for 18 Golds in 2 consecutive turns).
We decided that Gold gaining was way OP, even without +Buy (as was the case).
Game 2:
Cost tweaked to 4/1P, gains Silver instead of Gold - Overall a really big nerf.
Vineyard/University/Lab/Council Room on the board, I used Druid to gain Potions and thin my deck while my opponent didn't - I won. (Lots of Potions+Universities+Lots of Drawing+Buys=4-Vineyard turn!) (Had he bought more vineyards before I pulled the trigger he'd had probably won)

The current status of the card is:
5$/1P
Trash up to 2.
If you Trashed two Potions this way, Gain as many Silvers as there are Potions in the Trash.
Every player (including you) Gains a Potion.

Ideas I'm thinking about:
- removing the Potion cost: it's still unused and weakens a bit the junking effect.
- Reverting it to gaining "Gold or Silver", since now we're a bit less naive and we'll be more wary of building it up for our opponent (the "or Silver" part is because in game 1 I could've pulled a 12 but the Gold was all gone, and that's a big advantage to p1).
- making it: If you didn't trash Potions this way, gain something depending on the Potions in the Trash - because it could be interesting.
- capping the gain bonus
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2015, 11:06:19 am »
+1

This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.

Example

Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost

Not sure if intended, but as written, you still need $6 available in order to get this, even if you don't actually use up the $6.

I thought that at first, but it's the same wording as overpay, which makes me think that such wording can trigger before you actually have to pay the money. LastFootnote used the same wording in his example wording. I guess it's not completely clear. If it doesn't work, then you have to  be more convoluted in the wording:

"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.
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

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2015, 11:16:44 am »
+2

This does make me want to see some other ideas with a dual cost, or alternative cost. Though for any possible cost other than Potion, you'd definitely have to use LastFootnote's suggestion of having it in the card text, which elimination the neat interaction that this has where both $4 and PP are costs that it has. In a way Peddler already has this concept, but you could do a lot more with it.

Example

Some Card - $6*
Some effect that's almost good enough to cost $6 but not quite
-----------------------
When you buy this, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying its cost

Not sure if intended, but as written, you still need $6 available in order to get this, even if you don't actually use up the $6.

I thought that at first, but it's the same wording as overpay, which makes me think that such wording can trigger before you actually have to pay the money. LastFootnote used the same wording in his example wording. I guess it's not completely clear. If it doesn't work, then you have to  be more convoluted in the wording:

"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.

I always assumed you payed for a card, which made you buy it, which triggered an effect that allowed you to pay (additional) money for some effect. In a way i even think that "overpay" could have been "When you buy this, you may pay any amount of $", using the wording of Storyteller. I think "you may overpay" was mostly to keep people from assuming you could pay less.

I'm going to ask Donald about this now.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2015, 11:37:41 am »
0

"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.

Why not just "You may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying this card's cost"? I think that should work. If it doesn't work, then you could use "When you would pay this card's cost, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead".
« Last Edit: June 02, 2015, 11:38:59 am by Awaclus »
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

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2015, 12:15:24 pm »
0

"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.

Why not just "You may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying this card's cost"? I think that should work.

That might work, but it sort of makes me think "when does this happen?" because it doesn't specify a "when".

Quote
If it doesn't work, then you could use "When you would pay this card's cost, you may trash a Silver from your hand instead".

This one won't work, because you would need to have enough money to afford it before "when you would pay" would trigger.
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

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7495
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10721
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #19 on: June 02, 2015, 12:28:47 pm »
+2

I had a card with an alternate way to buy it at one point. I used "When buying this, you may ... instead of paying its cost". You can clarify in the FAQ that you don't need to have enough Coins to buy it normally if you do whatever the alternate cost is.

EDIT: Donald's outtake that did this uses this phrasing: "Instead of paying the cost to buy this, you may trash two Action cards from your hand."
« Last Edit: June 02, 2015, 12:32:29 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9187
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #20 on: June 02, 2015, 12:45:24 pm »
0

Using "when you buy" phrasing doesn't work because you need enough coins to buy.  If you can't afford it, then you never get to trigger the when-buy that grants you the alternate cost.

That outtake wording works by having earlier timing.

Another alternative would be to give it a $0* cost with a Peddler-like conditional that raises the cost if you don't do X.  But this could have poor interaction with gainers depending on wording, and would behave differently with TfB.
Logged

Awaclus

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11808
  • Shuffle iT Username: Awaclus
  • (´。• ω •。`)
  • Respect: +12846
    • View Profile
    • Birds of Necama
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #21 on: June 02, 2015, 12:55:14 pm »
0

"In games using this. during your buy phase, you may spend a buy and trash a Silver. If you do, gain a [card name]." That sounds terrible though, and it doesn't work with Black Market.

Why not just "You may trash a Silver from your hand instead of paying this card's cost"? I think that should work.

That might work, but it sort of makes me think "when does this happen?" because it doesn't specify a "when".

It happens all the time.
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

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #22 on: June 02, 2015, 02:31:53 pm »
+1

If nothing else works, the kingdom card could come with an Event:

Some Card, 6$, Action
Some effect
---
Setup: Use Strange Event.


Strange Event, 0$
You may trash a Silver from your hand. If you do, gain a Some Card. (or: gain an Action card costing up to $6).


Edit: But i guess you don't have to go this way. Donald's wording (together with a * at the price tag) seems fine. (Still i'm wondering what you could do with setup events, but that's a different thing...)
Edit 2: Probably i'm just trying to superfluously solve every problem with the new Adventures mechanics recently. Just ignore me.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2015, 02:35:59 pm by Asper »
Logged

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #23 on: June 02, 2015, 02:38:30 pm »
+1

I think dual-cost as this is could work fine with a few FAQ clarifications.  "I play Remodel, trashing my Druid, choosing the PP cost and gaining a Scrying Pool." was how I originally read it.  I think Apprentice should give you either +4 Cards if you trash it as $4, and +2 Cards if you trash it as PP (as Apprentice just gives you the +2 Cards if it has a Potion, not +2 per Potion).
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm

sudgy

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3431
  • Shuffle iT Username: sudgy
  • It's pronounced "SOO-jee"
  • Respect: +2706
    • View Profile
Re: Druid - the dual-cost Gainer-Trasher-Junker you've been waiting for.
« Reply #24 on: June 02, 2015, 02:40:25 pm »
+1

Actually, talking about Highway on a Potion-costing card, -$1P isn't less than $0, so shouldn't a Highway (and other cost reducers) make Potion-costing cards cost negative coins?
Logged
If you're wondering what my avatar is, watch this.

Check out my logic puzzle blog!

   Quote from: sudgy on June 31, 2011, 11:47:46 pm
Pages: [1] 2  All
 

Page created in 0.106 seconds with 20 queries.