Print

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

[GendoIkari]

I have a feeling that I may have made this exact thread before, a long time ago. I hope not. Anyway, to continue my general habit of not posting an actual fan card, but a generic idea that could be used in a fan card....

Some of my favorite cards in MTG are alternate win condition cards. Cards that specifically state "At the beginning of your upkeep, if you _____, then you win the game." Suddenly there's a completely new goal to the game... no longer do you need to think about damaging your opponent; you just need to think about staying alive long enough to pull together whatever conditions you need. I think it would be cool if a card in Dominion did this.

Of course I realize that in some ways, alt-VP cards fulfill this niche. Heck, they even have "alternate" right there in the (unofficial) name! But still they are ultimately about having the most total VP when either Provinces, Colonies, or any 3 piles are emptied. So the game still ends in the same way. But surely there could be a fun and balanced card that creates a completely different game-end / win condition?

Just to give a very general (and bad) idea of what I mean...

Lottery - Action -
Reveal your hand. If you reveal a Gold, a Silver, a Copper, a Province, a Duchy, an Estate, and a Curse, you win the game.

Of course the problem with that example is that on almost any board that allows you to draw your deck, it becomes really easy. And on many other boards, it becomes literally impossible. The key to making such a card would be finding the balance where the condition is about as hard to reach as it is to end the game while ahead on points anyway. This way it's an interesting decision whether to go for the card or not.

Also, this may work better as an event, because there's no reason to ever buy more than 1 of those. Though the card could instead require you to reveal multiple copies of that card from your hand.

Oh yeah, and since "you win the game" isn't defined Dominion terminology (even though it's quite unambiguous), you could always get around that by having it say "you gain 1,000,000 and the remaining Provinces."

[LastFootnote]

Oh yeah, and since "you win the game" isn't defined Dominion terminology (even though it's quite unambiguous), you could always get around that by having it say "you gain 1,000,000 and the remaining Provinces."

I think it's fine to do things that can't be done with current Dominion terminology; Donald does it all the time! The important thing is that it's unambiguous, and "you win the game" is quite clear.

[popsofctown]

Yeah if a card disagrees with the rules, the card wins.  "You win the game" is  unambiguous and overrides the rules about how the game ends.

[popsofctown]

Flourish
6$ Action - Discolored backing

Count the cards in your deck, hand, discard pile (face down), and all cards you own on mats and set aside.  If the total is 55, you win the game.
+4 buys +1$
______________________________________
When you shuffle, you may put Flourish anywhere in your deck

Vassal
2$ Action - Duration - Looter
At the start of each of your turns, you may set a Duchy aside with Vassal.  If you do, gain a Ruins.
When you set a sixth Duchy aside with Vassal this way, return all other Duchies to your hand and win the game.


Mad Emissary
2$ Action - Victory
Reveal a card from your hand.  You may return it to the supply.  Each other player gains a copy of it.  If there are now 7 Golds missing from the Gold pile for each player in the game, end the game.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Worth 300 VP for each opponent with 8 or more golds.

[Accatitippi]

Yeah, the problem would be that there's not a lot of design space left since there's alt-vp that rewards most feats.

But here is a quick idea:
Engineers' Village 4$ Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--------
While this is in play: at the end of your Action phase, if you've just played at least one copy of every Action card in the Kingdom, you win the game.

It has some tracking issues (eg with Feast, Procession), and it can lead to weird swingy games with many alt vp and alt-treasures, but it sounds fun to me.

[GendoIkari]

Yeah, the problem would be that there's not a lot of design space left since there's alt-vp that rewards most feats.

But here is a quick idea:
Engineers' Village 4$ Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--------
While this is in play: at the end of your Action phase, if you've just played at least one copy of every Action card in the Kingdom, you win the game.

It has some tracking issues (eg with Feast, Procession), and it can lead to weird swingy games with many alt vp and alt-treasures, but it sounds fun to me.

This card already exists; it's called "Horn of Plenty". 

[Mr Anderson]

Engineers' Village 4$ Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--------
While this is in play: at the end of your Action phase, if you have at least one copy of every Action card in the Kingdom in play, you win the game.

This fixes the tracking issue.

[singletee]

Engineers' Village 4$ Action
+1 Card
+2 Actions
--------
While this is in play: at the end of your Action phase, if you have at least one copy of every Action card in the Kingdom in play, you win the game.

This fixes the tracking issue.

But it doesn't work with Feast, Island, Embargo, etc.

[Awaclus]

But it doesn't work with Feast, Island, Embargo, etc.

So then it's like a Fortress in a kingdom with no trashing.

[LastFootnote]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

[AJD]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

I think it is clear, and yes. It could be "differently-named Action card" for clarity. Or to resolve it the other way, "card from each Action pile".

[LastFootnote]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

I think it is clear, and yes. It could be "differently-named Action card" for clarity. Or to resolve it the other way, "card from each Action pile".

What's "in the Kingdom", though? Is the Black Market deck "in the Kingdom"? Are Madmen "in the Kingdom"? I mean you could define that in the rules, but I'm just saying it's not currently defined.

[GendoIkari]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

I think it is clear, and yes. It could be "differently-named Action card" for clarity. Or to resolve it the other way, "card from each Action pile".

What's "in the Kingdom", though? Is the Black Market deck "in the Kingdom"? Are Madmen "in the Kingdom"? I mean you could define that in the rules, but I'm just saying it's not currently defined.

This can be easily fixed by using "in the supply" instead. It does mean that you would need Ruins as well.

[LastFootnote]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

I think it is clear, and yes. It could be "differently-named Action card" for clarity. Or to resolve it the other way, "card from each Action pile".

What's "in the Kingdom", though? Is the Black Market deck "in the Kingdom"? Are Madmen "in the Kingdom"? I mean you could define that in the rules, but I'm just saying it's not currently defined.

This can be easily fixed by using "in the supply" instead. It does mean that you would need Ruins as well.

That's another issue, then. You don't know which Ruins are in any given game.

[GendoIkari]

Also, "every Action card in the Kingdom" isn't always clear. Do you have to have all 10 Knights?

I think it is clear, and yes. It could be "differently-named Action card" for clarity. Or to resolve it the other way, "card from each Action pile".

What's "in the Kingdom", though? Is the Black Market deck "in the Kingdom"? Are Madmen "in the Kingdom"? I mean you could define that in the rules, but I'm just saying it's not currently defined.

This can be easily fixed by using "in the supply" instead. It does mean that you would need Ruins as well.

That's another issue, then. You don't know which Ruins are in any given game.

Which is why it needs to refer to piles, not individual cards. Also because of Knights.

[Asper]

Bongo of Copiousness, Treasure, $5
2$
When you play this, if you have a card from every treasure and action supply pile in play, gain any number of Provinces.

I agree that "You win" is unambigous. Just felt the wording would be a little more interesting, as ayou might still not be able to turn things around.

[Beyond Awesome]

Here is an interesting idea. The wincon is hard to pull off, so I think this makes it interesting

Psychotic Witch $5
+ $2
Each other player gains a curse. If you have 10 or more curses in your deck, you win the game.


Or, maybe this version is more interesting. I do like the conflict of the above card though.

Psychotic Witch $5

+ 2 Cards
You gain a curse. Search your discard pile, deck, and hand for a curse and set it aside on your Tavern mat. If you have 10 or more curses on your Tavern mat, you win the game.

[market squire]

Interesting thread.
The problem is that a totally new winning condition makes VPs obsolete. It's hard to design it so that they are still interesting.
E.g. I really much prefer Horn of Plenty to all the "play every card to win" suggestions. The Psychotic Witch idea might work (the second one has no point though because the curses don't harm you at all), but it doesn't sound like fun and it's really counterintuitive to win with curses.

I'd rather do an alternate game end condition, like this:

Jeweller (Action) $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 VP
If you have at least 25 VP (tokens), the game ends after this turn.

This might create a bit more tension.
But still I'll think about an instant win card.

[GendoIkari]

Interesting thread.
The problem is that a totally new winning condition makes VPs obsolete.

Well they can if not done carefully, but this is why the condition needs to be just as hard to meet as it is to end the game with a bunch of points. Like how in MTG, the alternate win conditions need to be as hard or harder than doing 20 damage to your opponent.

[Beyond Awesome]

Interesting thread.
The problem is that a totally new winning condition makes VPs obsolete. It's hard to design it so that they are still interesting.
E.g. I really much prefer Horn of Plenty to all the "play every card to win" suggestions. The Psychotic Witch idea might work (the second one has no point though because the curses don't harm you at all), but it doesn't sound like fun and it's really counterintuitive to win with curses.

With my second version of Psycho Witch, I was thinking of how do you prove you have 10 curses, so a mat makes that easy. I guess another possibility is that you gain the curses to your deck, but at any time when you play Psychotic Witch, you may reveal your hand, search your deck and discard pile and reveal any curses you have. If you have at least 10 curses, you win the game.

[Awaclus]

Well they can if not done carefully, but this is why the condition needs to be just as hard to meet as it is to end the game with a bunch of points. Like how in MTG, the alternate win conditions need to be as hard or harder than doing 20 damage to your opponent.

It's different in MtG though, since the alternative win con is always available to the deck that needs it and vice versa if it's worth playing at all. In Dominion, it can't possibly be balanced in every game — unless it's useless every time, it's going to make VPs obsolete sometimes.

[LastFootnote]

Well they can if not done carefully, but this is why the condition needs to be just as hard to meet as it is to end the game with a bunch of points. Like how in MTG, the alternate win conditions need to be as hard or harder than doing 20 damage to your opponent.

It's different in MtG though, since the alternative win con is always available to the deck that needs it and vice versa if it's worth playing at all. In Dominion, it can't possibly be balanced in every game — unless it's useless every time, it's going to make VPs obsolete sometimes.

That's like...all of Dominion, though. Depending on what's available, some strategy may become dominant. As long at it's not trivial to determine when to go for it and someone not going for it usually has a shot at winning, it should be fine.

[popsofctown]

Goons is already an alternate win condition in practice.

[faust]

I think cards like this should, if at all possible, work on a VP basis. That way, they sometimes give a completely alternate win condition, sometimes they help a VP-based strategy, sometimes they do nothing. Consider the following card:

Fair - Action - $4

Gain one VP token per card you have in play. Trash this.

I think this has more appeal than:

Unfair - Action - $4

If you have more than 30 cards in play, you win.

Though often they will play out similarly.

[Awaclus]

Well they can if not done carefully, but this is why the condition needs to be just as hard to meet as it is to end the game with a bunch of points. Like how in MTG, the alternate win conditions need to be as hard or harder than doing 20 damage to your opponent.

It's different in MtG though, since the alternative win con is always available to the deck that needs it and vice versa if it's worth playing at all. In Dominion, it can't possibly be balanced in every game — unless it's useless every time, it's going to make VPs obsolete sometimes.

That's like...all of Dominion, though. Depending on what's available, some strategy may become dominant. As long at it's not trivial to determine when to go for it and someone not going for it usually has a shot at winning, it should be fine.

That was my point.