Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]

Author Topic: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Results!)  (Read 11635 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
+3

Results!
View Finalists
View Cards Submitted

This is the second contest for this year's set. This week's challenge: Design a card which would fit well in the Base Set!

Submission Rules

• Each participant may submit one card per challenge.
• Participation in previous or future challenges is not required to participate in this one.
• Submit your card to me via this forum's messaging system. Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.
• Each card you submit must have a name, a cost, a list of types, and the exact wording that should appear on the card.  Also include a brief description of any special design considerations (e.g., Stash having a unique back), but do NOT include any other information, such as strategic commentary or examples about it would play.
• The name you give your card will appear on the ballot. If multiple cards with the same name are submitted, I will differentiate them with letters in a randomly chosen order, e.g. [Card Name] A, [Card Name] B, etc. Cards themselves will likewise be listed in a random order on the ballot.
• I will accept revisions to your contest entries provided they are submitted to me before the deadline.  If you submit a revision to an entry you have previously submitted to me, resubmit your revised card(s) in their entirety.
• Only submit cards that are your own design.
• You may submit cards that have been previously posted here in this forum, including those that have been refined by the community as a whole, provided you can still claim that the central conceit of the card -- and the majority of its final version -- is yours.
• A single card might conceivably qualify for multiple challenges within this series. If your card doesn't win the first challenge you submit it to, you may submit it for any and all future challenges (until it wins), provided the card fits those challenges. This is particularly pertinent for cards that don't win the first of two slots for a large expansion, although depending on which card does win, your card may not qualify for the second challenge.
• Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere!

Except where specified, you may not submit cards combine certain mechanics from multiple expansions. The idea is that you could simply slot the cards into their respective sets without needing components or rules specific to another set. Specifically:

• Duration cards may only be submitted as candidates for a Seaside or Adventures slot.
• Potion-cost cards may only be submitted as candidates for the Alchemy slot.
• Cards that use VP tokens or cost $7 or more may only be submitted as candidates for a Prosperity slot.
• Cards that use Coin tokens and cards that use overpay may only be submitted as candidates for the Guilds slot.
• Cards that use Ruins (Looters) and cards that use Spoils may only be submitted as candidates for a Dark Ages slot.
• Traveller cards, Reserve cards, and cards making use of player Tokens may only be submitted as candidates for an Adventures slot.

Many mechanics are fair game for any submission. The following is an incomplete list.

• Victory/Action and Victory/Treasure hybrid cards.
• Cards that allow you to choose an ability from a list.
• Cards with on-buy, would-gain, on-gain, and on-trash abilities.



Challenge #2: Base Set

Design a card which would fit into the Base Set. Such a card could have one or more of the following qualities:

• Only has Vanilla properties (+Cards, +Actions, +Buy, and +$1).
• Minimal card text.
• Does not require new rules or mechanics beyond those found in the Base Set.

Submissions are due by the end of Tuesday, 2016-01-19. (Voting may be delayed due to baby!)
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 06:14:26 pm by mith »
Logged

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2016, 12:25:49 pm »
0

Congratulations again!
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1525
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1456
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2016, 01:00:40 pm »
0

I'm really looking forward to seeing what people can make out of this.

By the way I don't think the short text rule is important for the base set since there are quite a few cards with long, relatively complicated text (Thief, Bureaucrat)
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

There is no bad shuffle that can not be surmounted by scorn.

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2016, 02:11:07 pm »
0

I'm really looking forward to seeing what people can make out of this.

By the way I don't think the short text rule is important for the base set since there are quite a few cards with long, relatively complicated text (Thief, Bureaucrat)
Adventurer too!
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2016, 04:10:50 pm »
0

I'm really looking forward to seeing what people can make out of this.

By the way I don't think the short text rule is important for the base set since there are quite a few cards with long, relatively complicated text (Thief, Bureaucrat)

It's not a rule, but it's enough of a "theme" to warrant including as a suggested quality.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2016, 04:28:55 pm »
+5

I think the best quality for a new Base Set card to have is: fits well in the Base Set. The Base Set has lots of "holes", and ideally a new card would fill at least one of them.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2016, 05:06:05 pm »
0

I think the best quality for a new Base Set card to have is: fits well in the Base Set. The Base Set has lots of "holes", and ideally a new card would fill at least one of them.

Do you have time to elaborate on what you think the holes are?

Extra trashing seems to be one thing.  More non-terminals as well?
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2016, 05:17:09 pm »
0

I'm torn between fitting the pattern of the base set, or filling a gap in the base set.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1314
  • Respect: +1545
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2016, 07:19:41 pm »
+2

Another thought: a lot of cards in the base set are meant to provide relatively simple introductions to core Dominion ideas - Gardens teaches about alt-VP and slogs, Thief makes you consider running a Treasure-less strategy, Chapel is about trashing everything. What core ideas don't have a base-set introduction?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2016, 08:47:33 pm »
0

Do you have time to elaborate on what you think the holes are?

Extra trashing seems to be one thing.  More non-terminals as well?

Those are the two big ones. Especially Curse trashing and cheap (≤$4) non-terminals.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2016, 08:48:28 pm »
0

What core ideas don't have a base-set introduction?

Kingdom Treasures, I guess.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1171
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +900
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2016, 09:18:59 pm »
0

Can I request that you do these contests a tad bit slower?  There's now three going on at the same time not including the run-offs from the old contests.

EDIT: Nevermind, I hadn't seen the last couple posts on the Event contest thread when I wrote this.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2016, 09:27:09 pm by LibraryAdventurer »
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #12 on: January 19, 2016, 02:06:40 am »
+3

I gotta say. It was not easy coming up with something that the Base set needs, that doesn't seem to be covered by real cards in real expansions.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
  • Respect: +362
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2016, 11:04:55 am »
+12

I gotta say. It was not easy coming up with something that the Base set needs, that doesn't seem to be covered by real cards in real expansions.

I almost accidentally submitted Junk Dealer.
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2016, 03:32:18 pm »
0

Deadline for submissions is tonight!
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2016, 10:30:45 pm »
+1

(Probably won't be updating until tomorrow sometime, actually. Work has been nuts, trying to get stuff done before I take time off with baby, and I'm pooped tonight.

Baby is taking his time, though. :))
« Last Edit: January 20, 2016, 11:11:56 am by mith »
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1314
  • Respect: +1545
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2016, 11:54:34 pm »
0

I've realised that this is possibly the only card design contest where "It's fairly plain and doesn't do anything new" can actually be praise.
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2016, 10:36:26 pm »
+2

15 cards this time!

Quote
Archer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$1
+1 Buy
You may discard a card. If you do, +2 cards

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
+2 Actions
+$1
Each other player with 5 or more cards discards a card.

Quote
Benefactor
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
Gain a Silver, putting it into your hand.
Each other player gains a Copper.

Quote
Calendar
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+6 Cards
Put five cards from your hand on top of your deck.

Quote
Cloister
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Actions
Look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.

Quote
Florist
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If you have an even number of cards in play (counting this), +$1.

Quote
Handler
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may trash card from your hand which is not a Treasure. If you do: +$1

Quote
Ironsmelter
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash 2 cards from your hand.
For each...
... Action card, +1 Action
... Treasure card, +$1
... Victory card, +1 Card.

Quote
Lord
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards
You may trash a Victory card from your hand. +$ equal to its cost. Each other player may gain an Estate.

Quote
Paddock
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver.

Quote
Pilgrim
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Duchy

Quote
Reconstruct
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action
Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card with the same cost, putting it in your hand.

Quote
Swamp Tower
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 cards. Discard 2 cards. +2 cards.

Quote
Synod
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Actions
Name a cost. Reveal your hand and trash all cards with that cost from your hand. You may gain a card costing up to $1 per card trashed.

Quote
Voucher
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1
+1 Buy
« Last Edit: January 25, 2016, 04:10:57 pm by mith »
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #18 on: January 21, 2016, 12:22:42 am »
+1

This will give away that I did not design it, but:

Florist should be renamed Florst.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #19 on: January 21, 2016, 12:35:25 am »
+1

For base set, I'm going to favour simple entries that fill the niches that were discussed earlier - low cost, non-terminal, trashing.  Moreover, since base set is one that favours Big Money rather heavily (to the point where plenty of game enthusiasts gave up on it and still have misconceptions about it), I'm hoping for something that favours the engine a bit more.

One of these is my submission, but it was a last minute entry that I'm not totally sure about.

Since Base is about simplicity, I'm going to try to keep thoughts brief. :P

Quote
Archer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+$1
+1 Buy
You may discard a card. If you do, +2 cards

I like it, but I'd like it more with a mandatory discard and draw.

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
+2 Actions
+$1
Each other player with 5 or more cards discards a card.

Cool, sounds fine to me.

Quote
Benefactor
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
Gain a Silver, putting it into your hand.
Each other player gains a Copper.

Unmitigated Copper junking has problems with scaling.  Since this is a Silver gainer, I think it favours Big Money too much.

Quote
Calendar
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+6 Cards
Put five cards from your hand on top of your deck.

That AP though.  I don't think this would be so fun to play.

Quote
Cloister
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Actions
Look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.

Cool, sounds fine to me.

Quote
Florist
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If you have an even number of cards in play (counting this), +$1.

Sounds fine to me, but I don't know if I actually like it and I don't know why.

Quote
Handler
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may trash card from your hand which is not a Treasure. If you do: +$1

Hm.  I don't like the idea of a Market variant in the set which actually has Market, but I'm not sure if it's correct to call this a Market variant when I mostly think of that as "cantrip coin".  I think I'd like this more if it were cheaper and weaker.

Quote
Ironsmelter
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash 2 cards from your hand.
For each...
... Action card, +1 Action
... Treasure card, +$1
... Victory card, +1 Card.

Doesn't feel like base set to me.

Quote
Lord
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards
You may trash a Victory card from your hand. +$ equal to its cost. Each other player may gain an Estate.

Doesn't feel like base set to me.  I might like it more if it were mandatory, but even then I think it has too many parts to it.  The Estate gain option feels kind of superfluous, though I guess it's there for the theme of a Lord bequeathing lands?  But it's an option that would rarely be taken.

Quote
Paddock
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver.

This is even more like Market than Handler.  Too similar for me.  The high cost and the Silver-gaining go against what I'm hoping for from this contest.

Quote
Pilgrim
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Duchy

I like it a lot for its simplicity and for doing something different.  I don't like that it costs $6 (for meta reasons!), but that is probably the right cost for this card.  Hmm.

Quote
Reconstruct
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action
Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card with the same cost, putting it in your hand.

Sounds alright.  I think I'd like it more with a mandatory gain.  Worried that it may cause some crazy fast 3 pile endings, and it may also be a bit swingy.  Interesting though.

Quote
Swamp Tower
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 cards. Discard 2 cards. +2 cards.

The name is weird.  As with Pilgrim, the high cost is off-putting to me but it seems appropriate for the effect.  I like the idea a lot, though after thinking about it, I'd find it more interesting if the discard happened first even though it would look less flashy at first glance (the symmetry of the effects is alluring like that).  "Discard 2 cards, +4 cards" would be restrictive enough that it could probably cost $4, or even $3.

With this and Archer, I find that I'm intrigued by the idea of big draw that is hindered by discarding first.  I now have several ideas to iterate on that...

Quote
Synod
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Actions
Name a cost. Reveal your hand and trash all cards with that cost from your hand. You may gain a card costing up to $1 per card trashed.

Doesn't feel like base set to me.

Quote
Voucher
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1
+1 Buy

This is a $2 card at most, but that can be adjusted later.  However, this is too similar to Candlestick Maker for me.  Both are essentially a Copper with a Buy.  Voucher is actually a Treasure, but that usually doesn't make a big difference.  Safety with terminal draw is the most common case where it matters, I think.  CSM provides a coin token instead of just +$1, which is way better.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #20 on: January 21, 2016, 03:32:02 am »
+1

Archer and Barracks are fine.

Benefactor seems too strong compared to Explorer.

Calender is a crazy sifter. Due to the unusual high numbers I'd test it at 6/5 as well as 5/4.

Cloister is probably on the stronger side but not overpowered.

Florist is a great Peddler variant.

Handler is obviously too strong.

Ironsmelter, my card, is OK but would fit Intrigue better due to the semi-choice thingy.

Lord is the most novel and interesting idea. Baron and Salvager do come to mind but with Baron you do not necessarily wanna junk your deck with Estates whereas with Lord you actually might wanna take them when another player plays Lord as you can trash and Salvage-ify them.

As Silver is more often a necessary evil than something you strive for Asper's Paddock would be better if the Silver gaining would be optional.

Pilgrim, a cantrip VP card gainer, is also fairly novel.

Reconstruct seems like a decent cantrip/Remodel variant.

Swamp Tower is virtually always inferior to Embassy and thus has to cost 4$.

Synod seems good. Nice concidence that there are two Necropolis forced trasher variants submitted.

Voucher is far weaker (terminal and virtual coin instead of Coin token) than Candlestick Maker and should not exist.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 03:33:16 am by tristan »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set
« Reply #21 on: January 21, 2016, 11:30:13 am »
+2

Since I haven't said it yet, thanks to mith for finishing up this contest. And apologies to everyone for letting it die earlier without finding a replacement moderator at the time.

My Top Picks

Quote
Reconstruct
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action
Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card with the same cost, putting it in your hand.

I like this concept a lot, but I am worried about it just running out piles. It can especially accelerate the game once you're replacing Provinces with Provinces. I'm not sure whether I will vote for this one.

Quote
Swamp Tower
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 cards. Discard 2 cards. +2 cards.

Very simple, and probably plays pretty differently from any published card. I think maybe it could cost $4, but that won't stop me from voting for it.

Quote
Paddock
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver.

A classic-looking card. I'd want to test to make sure spamming these isn't too strong, but I like the concept.

Quote
Florist
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If you have an even number of cards in play (counting this), +$1.

This is my favorite. Such a cool Peddler-with-a-penalty! They can always activate each other in a pinch, but the real fun will be trying to get +$1 out of all of them. Five stars!
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 12:01:45 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
  • Respect: +972
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #22 on: January 21, 2016, 02:57:00 pm »
0

The way I think of the Base Set is that it established all the different card prototypes.  Witch is the prototypical curser, Workshop the prototypical gainer, Village the prototypical splitter, Remodel the prototypical trash for benefit etc.

So the cards I am most excited about are ones that seem to do something new, but in a fairly basic way.  Pilgrim is the one that seems to fit this the best.  I'm so interested to see whether it actually works as a card.  I'd be worried that duchies will run out and then no one will be able to end the game.

Along similar lines, I also express enthusiasm for Reconstruct, which is neither really a trasher nor trash for benefit (ETA: The gaining is optional.  I missed that).  Paddock explores the new space of cantrip silver gaining.  Lord isn't very basic, but is definitely doing something different--terminal draw plus trashing has only been done by Masquerade, and victory trashing has only been done by Rebuild.

Lots of other interesting cards here too.  I'll have a hard time voting.
« Last Edit: January 21, 2016, 03:00:40 pm by trivialknot »
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2923
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3701
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #23 on: January 21, 2016, 03:29:38 pm »
0

I think Florist really doesn't sound like a base-set card to me. It'd be much more at home in Intrigue—it seems to belong to the same category as Shanty Town and Conspirator.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #24 on: January 21, 2016, 03:36:12 pm »
0

I think Florist really doesn't sound like a base-set card to me. It'd be much more at home in Intrigue—it seems to belong to the same category as Shanty Town and Conspirator.

I think Intrigue doesn't need both Conspirator and Florist; they're too similar. Florist is simple enough to be in the Base set and counters one of the things some new players complain about: that you autoplay your turn.
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2923
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3701
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #25 on: January 21, 2016, 03:40:39 pm »
0

I mean, I agree that it'd be redundant in Intrigue—I just mean that "card that does different things depending on the circumstances in which it is played" isn't really a base-set concept.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #26 on: January 21, 2016, 03:47:42 pm »
+1

I mean, I agree that it'd be redundant in Intrigue—I just mean that "card that does different things depending on the circumstances in which it is played" isn't really a base-set concept.

It's not a base-set concept because it doesn't yet exist in the base set. It's not too complex to exist in the base set, and it doesn't offer an explicit choice in its on-play effect. If we limit ourselves only to things that already exist in the base set, we're going to come up with something that's redundant with what the base set already has.

I mean I like Swamp Tower, but the base set has no shortage of card drawing, and already has some sifting as well.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #27 on: January 21, 2016, 04:09:07 pm »
+1

I mean, I agree that it'd be redundant in Intrigue—I just mean that "card that does different things depending on the circumstances in which it is played" isn't really a base-set concept.

It's not a base-set concept because it doesn't yet exist in the base set. It's not too complex to exist in the base set, and it doesn't offer an explicit choice in its on-play effect. If we limit ourselves only to things that already exist in the base set, we're going to come up with something that's redundant with what the base set already has.

I mean I like Swamp Tower, but the base set has no shortage of card drawing, and already has some sifting as well.

You gave Paddock a thumbs up.  Isn't it redundant with Market, and the set overall which tends toward Big Money already?



I'm coming around on Florist though.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #28 on: January 21, 2016, 04:16:07 pm »
0

You gave Paddock a thumbs up.  Isn't it redundant with Market, and the set overall which tends toward Big Money already?

I wouldn't say it's totally redundant with Market, although clearly they are more similar than e.g. Market and Florist. Man, there were plenty of entries I didn't like. Anyway I stand by Florist being my top choice, and the order of my other three picks isn't so important to me.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #29 on: January 21, 2016, 05:18:58 pm »
0

Aw man, i'm going to lose at this one big time. Paddock stinks. I mean, i knew that when i had it enter the competition. It even forces you to gain a Silver. No choice. No "you may". No "gain a card costing up to $3", which would allow you to go for an engine and be pretty good. Just unflexible, mispriced Big Money support.

In other words, it's the perfect Base game card. The only thing i could have done better to make it more accurate was use "Gain a Silver card", but that was too much even for me.

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1010
  • Respect: +1983
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2016, 06:24:40 pm »
+1

I didn't actually get a chance to submit a card for this one.  I had several ideas, but I couldn't convince myself that any of them were even good enough that I'd vote for them.

Anyway, I think Pilgrim is by far the best card here.  Most of these cards are pretty underwhelming I think, which I guess is to be expected when you're designing cards to fit in with the base set.  But Pilgrim does something really unique and incredibly simple that fills a space the Base set hasn't already filled (and really none of the expansions have filled either, maybe with the exception of Rebuild).  Unlike Rebuild it doesn't deplete the main source of VP in the game (Provinces), and it adds green to your deck, so you would need to be careful overwhelming yourself with too many of them.  I think it's also good balance-wise.  It might be too strong, but if it is, the +1 card can be taken out, and possibly even the +1 action if it turns out to be way too strong.  I think there are a lot of decks where you'll want Pilgrim and a lot where you won't, and it's very different from any existing card, trying to think about which decks can make good use of it and which ones can't.

I'm really hoping Pilgrim wins.  If it doesn't, I think Florist, Reconstruct, and Swamp Tower are the next best options.  Florist looks a little awkward to me, but it does something unique and simple.  I agree that it feels more like an Intrigue card, but I think it still works as base.  Reconstruct is also really simple and unique.  Swamp Tower...I'm not quite as sure about, but it's extremely simple and does something that no other base set card does yet.  I think I'd like it better if the discarding happened first.
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 241
  • Respect: +406
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2016, 06:33:40 pm »
+1

Anyway, I think Pilgrim is by far the best card here

I'm keen on Staircase for the same reason :-)
Logged

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2016, 07:18:52 pm »
0

My three favorites are Cloister, Florist and Pilgrim.
Cloister would have an edge but it requires you to trash a card, which makes it much less useful in the later game and it requires deck tracking. And it requires you to look through your discard pile, which could take a little while in real life.

Florist is also very cool, almost no complaints but I'm not sure whether or not this belongs in the base set.

Pilgrim might be a little simple for me, but gaining Duchies is pretty cool. It'll need playtesting though.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Co0kieL0rd

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 729
  • Respect: +841
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2016, 09:33:42 pm »
+1

What the heck is going on here? Why is eHalcyon disguised as Lastfootnote while LastFootnote disguised as former Roadrunner?

Merely half of the cards seem like Base set to me, at best. I think Florist is actually the best submission. It offers something cute and original without being any complex. You can play it without thinking about play order but it has subtle potential to be played optimally which I like.
Logged
Check out my fan cards!
Dominion: Seasons - a small set Asper and I made that revolves around a unique and original mechanic
Roots and Renewal - this set is about interacting with the Supply and manipulating your opening turns
Flash cards - trying out a new concept

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3700
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2270
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #34 on: January 21, 2016, 09:47:35 pm »
0

I haven't had much time on my hands these days to comment, but I'm roughly of the opinion of Scott_Pilgrim. I like Pilgrim, Reconstruct, Swamp Tower, and Florist.

I'd say of those 4 cards Florist edges out a bit. Neat interaction with Throne Room too. You can just not Throne it if you won't get the bonus.

I like the simplicity of all the submissions for the most part. Very few cards on the dislike side of the spectrum for me.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1171
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +900
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #35 on: January 21, 2016, 11:02:38 pm »
0

Ones I like better than others:

Archer: I like it (should cost $3 though), but it would be redundant with woodcutter in the base set. I might vote for it anyway though because I like to vote for the ones I think are the best fan-made cards regardless of whether they'd actually fit well in the set.

Florist: I first glance, I didn't think it was interesting, but when I think how it would actually play it'd probably be fun.

Ironsmelter: Again, probably doesn't fit well in the base set, but I like it anyway (possibly because it's kinda similar to my Iron Furnace card).

Pilgrim: This is new. Might be good, bue seems like it'd make the duchies run out too fast.

Swamp Tower: agree with LastFootnote: probably should cost 4, but I think I'll vote for it anyway.

    Other ones I feel like commenting on:
Barracks: the attack is too weak to be worthwhile

Handler: Could be better than junk dealer if you're opponent is playing a curser.

Reconstruct: It's worth trying, but I think it'd make piles run out too fast. And it'd get dangerous past the beginning of the game like lookout, especially if there's a pile(s) of good cards already empty. If it's a card you want a lot of, then you don't want to trash it even if you can get a new one easily on the same turn.

Synod: Could be powerful while trashing coppers and estates, but it'd likely be a necropolis later on.

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2016, 01:16:16 pm »
+3

I feel like there is a general disagreement in the perception of "Base Set" in these comments.

Is "Base Set" a set of simple, but useful cards?

Is "Base Set" an introduction to future cards?

Obviously, there is the most to expand upon, and, well, we have expansions for that. As this collection of cards is undoubtedly an expansion in itself, are we striving to match the Base Set or are we attempting to expand the Base Set?
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2016, 01:30:46 pm »
0

I feel like there is a general disagreement in the perception of "Base Set" in these comments.

I'd say there are different interpretations. This doesn't have to be a bad thing.

XerxesPraelor

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1069
  • Respect: +362
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #38 on: January 23, 2016, 02:13:57 am »
+1

I feel like there is a general disagreement in the perception of "Base Set" in these comments.

I'd say there are different interpretations. This doesn't have to be a bad thing.

It looks like there are different interpretations of this situation. Maybe even a disagreement between you two.
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #39 on: January 23, 2016, 02:23:33 pm »
+1


Quote
Archer
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+$1
+1 Buy
You may discard a card. If you do, +2 cards
Terminal Market. I like it, but would prefer the discard to be mandatory.

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $3
+2 Actions
+$1
Each other player with 5 or more cards discards a card.
A mild attack Village. Seems useful.

Quote
Benefactor
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
Gain a Silver, putting it into your hand.
Each other player gains a Copper.
I don't think the Base Set needs more Treasure-based strategies.

Quote
Calendar
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+6 Cards
Put five cards from your hand on top of your deck.
This is a good sifter, but the net +1 Card seems minimal for the cost. Maybe it needs +1 Action as well?

Quote
Cloister
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Actions
Look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.
Trashing Village, I like it.

Quote
Florist
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If you have an even number of cards in play (counting this), +$1.
A sometimes Peddler. I'm torn on this one. I see the usefulness, but don't see "Base Set" at the same time.

Quote
Handler
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
You may trash card from your hand which is not a Treasure. If you do: +$1
Not much to see here, but I would buy at least one of these.

Quote
Ironsmelter
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Trash 2 cards from your hand.
For each...
... Action card, +1 Action
... Treasure card, +$1
... Victory card, +1 Card.
Put this in Intrigue.

Quote
Lord
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards
You may trash a Victory card from your hand. +$ equal to its cost. Each other player may gain an Estate.
I think, again, this would be better as a mandatory gain.

Quote
Paddock
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver.
I'd like to avoid Treasure in this set, but I do like this card.

Quote
Pilgrim
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Duchy
Here's something new to do with $7 and 1 Buy in the mid-late game.

Quote
Reconstruct
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Action
Trash the top card of your deck. You may gain a card with the same cost, putting it in your hand.
I don't know how I feel about blindly trashing the top card of my deck.

Quote
Swamp Tower
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 cards. Discard 2 cards. +2 cards.
The sifting function seems useful, but not strong enough to cost $5. Maybe $3 at the  most.

Quote
Synod
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 Actions
Name a cost. Reveal your hand and trash all cards with that cost from your hand. You may gain a card costing up to $1 per card trashed.
I like this card, but I think it might fit in better for another set?

Quote
Voucher
Types: Treasure
Cost: $4
Worth $1
+1 Buy
Once again, I would like to avoid Treasure strategies with these cards.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Graystripe77

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 421
  • 1.61803398874989...
  • Respect: +92
    • View Profile
    • Dreamkeeperscomic.com
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #40 on: January 24, 2016, 04:57:49 pm »
+2

Uh, my card was posted with the wrong price, and i think that may have an impact on the voting.
Logged

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1525
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1456
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #41 on: January 24, 2016, 05:13:53 pm »
0

Which card is it? I think correcting that is more important than anonymity at that point.
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

There is no bad shuffle that can not be surmounted by scorn.

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #42 on: January 24, 2016, 05:55:59 pm »
0

If it's Swamp Tower or Calendar that would explain the reaction immediately after my comments. I was of the understanding that cards would have to be tested to be price-balanced anyways.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #43 on: January 24, 2016, 06:07:42 pm »
0

Which card is it? I think correcting that is more important than anonymity at that point.

I agree. I mean, there are cards people already know are from certain people, either way.

Although i did wonder whether i should stop commenting on which cards are mine, but that's another topic.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #44 on: January 24, 2016, 08:17:16 pm »
0

If it's Swamp Tower or Calendar that would explain the reaction immediately after my comments. I was of the understanding that cards would have to be tested to be price-balanced anyways.

I'll comment on costs but I'm not going to vote or not vote because of a weird cost unless its an important part of the design (e.g. Band of Misfits, Border Village) or its especially egregious. 

It's easy to misjudge anyway.  When I first read it, I thought Swamp Tower would be fine at $5.  Others think it would be fine at $4 though, and I agree now.  I think $3 would be too low though.
Logged

Graystripe77

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 421
  • 1.61803398874989...
  • Respect: +92
    • View Profile
    • Dreamkeeperscomic.com
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #45 on: January 24, 2016, 10:36:33 pm »
+1

I guess since a few people would like it to be mentioned here, I would. it's already a card I've posted before anyway.

It's Archer, supposed to cost $4. makes a HUGE difference.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #46 on: January 25, 2016, 05:29:04 am »
0

I guess since a few people would like it to be mentioned here, I would. it's already a card I've posted before anyway.

It's Archer, supposed to cost $4. makes a HUGE difference.
I think that "+2 Cards, +1$, +1 Buy" would be a good 3$ and a weak 4$ so your card is probably balanced at 3$. 4$ seems too expensive to me.
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #47 on: January 25, 2016, 04:11:24 pm »
0

Archer has been modified, per designer request:

Quote
Archer
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$1
+1 Buy
You may discard a card. If you do, +2 cards
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2016, 04:15:28 pm »
+1

I think i liked Archer more at $2. :P
Logged

Graystripe77

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 421
  • 1.61803398874989...
  • Respect: +92
    • View Profile
    • Dreamkeeperscomic.com
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #49 on: January 26, 2016, 04:37:27 pm »
0

Not gonna rattle off strategy stuff, because i think that's against the rules, but the cost is definitely right.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +420
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #50 on: January 28, 2016, 08:05:14 am »
+2

For Tabletop Simulator, you can use this as the front of the cards:
Code: [Select]
http://i.imgur.com/rbjMz4p.jpgand this as the back:
Code: [Select]
http://i.imgur.com/yzZJDcw.jpg
EDIT: Mistyped one of the cards. Sorry.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2016, 08:16:40 am by Fragasnap »
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #51 on: January 28, 2016, 08:09:34 am »
0

Interesting that Swamp Tower got so many votes given that it is, except for Embassy's on-gain silver thingy, strictly inferior to Embassy. It definitely has to cost < 5$.
Logged

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #52 on: January 28, 2016, 08:22:21 am »
0

So are we doing finalists? Or did Pilgrim win?
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1314
  • Respect: +1545
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #53 on: January 28, 2016, 04:57:30 pm »
0

The votes are close enough that I'd expect a run-off, but it's up to mith.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1171
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +900
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #54 on: January 28, 2016, 07:48:35 pm »
0

Interesting that Swamp Tower got so many votes given that it is, except for Embassy's on-gain silver thingy, strictly inferior to Embassy. It definitely has to cost < 5$.
It's okay to vote for a card even though we know the cost needs to be changed. Cards can always be tweaked.

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #55 on: February 04, 2016, 05:36:59 pm »
+1

Preliminary Results:

Pilgrim - 14
Swamp Tower - 13
Florist - 12
Cloister - 11
Paddock - 8

Handler - 7
Barracks - 6
Reconstruct - 5
Benefactor - 4
Calendar - 4
Ironsmelter - 4
Archer - 3
Lord - 3
Synod - 2
Voucher - 1
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Voting!)
« Reply #56 on: February 04, 2016, 05:38:11 pm »
+2

Quote
Cloister
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Actions
Look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.

Quote
Florist
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+1 Card, +1 Action. If you have an even number of cards in play (counting this), +$1.

Quote
Paddock
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1$
Gain a Silver.

Quote
Pilgrim
Types: Action
Cost: $6
+1 Card
+1 Action
Gain a Duchy

Quote
Swamp Tower
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+2 cards. Discard 2 cards. +2 cards.

Submit your votes to me via this forum's messaging system. To vote, give each card a score from 0 to 10. (It is recommended, but not required, that you give at least one card a 0 and at least one card a 10, to maximize your voting input.) The winner will be the card with the highest sum. Feel free to discuss the cards (but not your scores) in this thread.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +420
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #57 on: February 04, 2016, 11:50:27 pm »
+2

Quote
Cloister
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+2 Actions. Look through your discard pile and trash a card from it.
Isn't Cloister quite nearly better than a cantrip trasher? It leaves you nonterminally with one-fewer-card hand size and you trash a card assuming you have a discard pile. Am I missing something? I think it crushes cards like Upgrade and Junk Dealer at a cost of $2.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2016, 11:51:36 pm by Fragasnap »
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #58 on: February 05, 2016, 02:30:36 am »
0

Well, I think we are voting on function first. Cost is mostly irrelevant. I think the bigger advantage is having much more control over what you trash. The $2 cost may be to prevent unlucky openings.
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #59 on: February 05, 2016, 12:22:12 pm »
0

Well, I think we are voting on function first. Cost is mostly irrelevant. I think the bigger advantage is having much more control over what you trash. The $2 cost may be to prevent unlucky openings.

Like Chapel, I guess.  It can still whiff if you draw it the turn after a reshuffle though (like on turn 3), which doesn't happen with the cantrip trashers.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #60 on: February 05, 2016, 01:03:47 pm »
0

Well, I think we are voting on function first. Cost is mostly irrelevant. I think the bigger advantage is having much more control over what you trash. The $2 cost may be to prevent unlucky openings.

Like Chapel, I guess.  It can still whiff if you draw it the turn after a reshuffle though (like on turn 3), which doesn't happen with the cantrip trashers.

On the other hand, a cantrip trasher may force you to trash a card from our hand. Depending on deck size and current situation, this may give you more or fewer cards to choose a target from.

Huh. Somehow i think the forced trash is really unpleasant. You might feel forced to learn your discard pile by heart when you play with this.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #61 on: February 05, 2016, 01:20:15 pm »
0

Well, I think we are voting on function first. Cost is mostly irrelevant. I think the bigger advantage is having much more control over what you trash. The $2 cost may be to prevent unlucky openings.

Like Chapel, I guess.  It can still whiff if you draw it the turn after a reshuffle though (like on turn 3), which doesn't happen with the cantrip trashers.

On the other hand, a cantrip trasher may force you to trash a card from our hand. Depending on deck size and current situation, this may give you more or fewer cards to choose a target from.

Huh. Somehow i think the forced trash is really unpleasant. You might feel forced to learn your discard pile by heart when you play with this.

Not sure what you mean about the forced trash.  The official cantrip trashers always force you to trash from your hand, but you're (usually) not forced to play them.  Or are you just comparing the search space of hand vs. discard?

I don't think you need to memorize your discard.  You just have to remember if the discard has anything you want (or wouldn't mind) to trash.  That should be easy enough. 

The turn 3 whiff is still what concerns me the most about it.  Like Counting House, it may feel bad if that happens.  Hermit mitigates that by allowing trashing from hand too.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #62 on: February 05, 2016, 01:50:47 pm »
0

The turn 3 whiff is still what concerns me the most about it.  Like Counting House, it may feel bad if that happens.  Hermit mitigates that by allowing trashing from hand too.
I guess that's why it only costs 2$. A Necro that trashes from the hand and discard would be too cheap for 2$.

Hermit is pretty good for cleaning out Curses, Ruins or Rats our of the discard. With a cantrip trasher you gotta wait until after the reshuffle the newly gained junked pairs with the cantrip trasher whereas discard trashers can get rid of that junk quicker. A non-terminal hand- and discard-trasher sounds too strong to me (Hermit is terminal and has the Treasure restriction).
« Last Edit: February 05, 2016, 01:52:22 pm by tristan »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4788
  • Respect: +5113
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #63 on: February 05, 2016, 02:36:20 pm »
0

Or are you just comparing the search space of hand vs. discard?

I don't think you need to memorize your discard.  You just have to remember if the discard has anything you want (or wouldn't mind) to trash.  That should be easy enough.

Yes, that's what i mean. You are right that you only have to remember a single value, though.

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #64 on: February 07, 2016, 07:25:25 pm »
0

Do we take cost into account or just the concept as writtzn?
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #65 on: February 07, 2016, 09:24:18 pm »
0

In general I ignore the costs... Unless it's like "this is super powerful so it costs $11)
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #66 on: February 08, 2016, 04:25:35 pm »
0

My favourites of the finalists are Pilgrim and Swamp Tower.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7011
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9705
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #67 on: February 08, 2016, 04:37:14 pm »
+1

I guess I don't see the appeal of Pilgrim. It only works at most 8 or 12 times, depending on the number of players. Now you can (and maybe should) argue that most Curse-giving cards only work 10 times. But the big difference is that players are usually not buying Curses during that period. When you want Pilgrim, you presumably also want to buy Duchies. Also it's just not very interesting? That's my opinion, anyway.

Swamp Tower is somewhat interesting, but I feel like the Base set is already overloaded with card drawing (Smithy, Library, Laboratory, Council Room; also Witch and Moat to a lesser extent).

I still like Florist best. The only reservation I have about it is how close it is to Conspirator. But whatever, it still seems like a cool Base set card to me.
Logged

Roadrunner7671

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1845
  • Shuffle iT Username: Roadrunner7672
  • Forum Mafia Record: 18-33-2
  • Respect: +1337
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #68 on: February 08, 2016, 04:42:53 pm »
0

Personally, I like the idea of a non-terminal Duchy gainer, but a cantrip Duchy gainer might be a little less appealing. I still think I like Pilgrim the most. Florist is very cool though.
Logged
Oh God someone delete this before Roadrunner sees it.

Fragasnap

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +420
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #69 on: February 08, 2016, 05:49:00 pm »
0

I played a couple Base-only games with Pilgrim, and I think it is just going to be game dominating and boring. Pilgrim is just a substitute for your first (and maybe your second) Duchy and then the pile empties. I'm missing the interesting part of it.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #70 on: February 08, 2016, 06:05:22 pm »
0

I played a couple Base-only games with Pilgrim, and I think it is just going to be game dominating and boring. Pilgrim is just a substitute for your first (and maybe your second) Duchy and then the pile empties. I'm missing the interesting part of it.

Hmm.  Well, I like it for its simplicity and novelty, but maybe it wouldn't actually be fun to play.  As far as it being dominating... what if it cost $7 or even $8?  What if it wasn't base only?
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #71 on: February 13, 2016, 06:31:37 pm »
0

Will close voting here on Monday.
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Finalists!)
« Reply #72 on: February 16, 2016, 06:13:35 pm »
+5

Results:

Florist (Fragasnap) - 56
Pilgrim (Roadrunner7671) - 52
Swamp Tower (spiralstaircase) - 50
Paddock (Asper) - 20
Cloister (eHalcyon) - 13

Another close one, congrats Fragasnap!
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Results!)
« Reply #73 on: February 16, 2016, 06:54:09 pm »
0

Congrats, Fragasnap!
Logged

markusin

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3700
  • Shuffle iT Username: markusin
  • I also switched from Starcraft
  • Respect: +2270
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Results!)
« Reply #74 on: February 16, 2016, 07:03:51 pm »
0

Ugh, did I forget to vote for this?

Well, I was going to vote for Florist anyway. Congratulations Fragasnap!

Edit: This post could use the exclamation mark.
« Last Edit: February 16, 2016, 07:54:11 pm by markusin »
Logged

mith

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 761
  • Shuffle iT Username: mith
  • Respect: +759
    • View Profile
    • MafiaScum.net
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Results!)
« Reply #75 on: September 29, 2016, 11:50:28 am »
+2

Bumping this thread to say that I find it interesting that the second edition of the base set added two Peddler variants (Merchant and Poacher). Florist feels less "necessary" now I guess (but it's still a cool card).
« Last Edit: September 29, 2016, 11:52:45 am by mith »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +420
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 2: Base Set (Results!)
« Reply #76 on: October 03, 2017, 07:13:27 pm »
+1

Sorry to necro-post here. Thanks for voting for my card.
Florist is a bit outmoded within Base after Second Edition's introduction of five-and-a-half cantrips. I think I still like it a little better than Merchant, though Merchant is a clever design in how it pushes players to playing the game better (since it gets players to focus more on Treasure).

Florist came about from, rather than playing the game better, learning the game better.
I feel like such an ass enforcing the rules minutia on players: Put your cards into play; keep your Victory cards in your hand; play all your Treasure before you buy anything; cards you gain go to your discard pile; blah, blah, blah. All I can say in my defense is that it sometimes matters. It never did in base games--but the game is super easy to follow even with more complex cards so long as you're in the habit of following the rules.

Florist says: You have to count the cards that are in play. It immediately gets players thinking about their play area as a zone distinct from their hands or discard piles which simplifies a lot of rules problems.
The precise effect was a simple elimination of the obvious from the granted position that first edition Base was in desperate need of low-cost cantrips: Card draw is probably too strong, splitting is probably too weak.
If I had to rework it to make it less intrusive around Merchant, I'd probably make it a Menagerie variant, drawing 3 when it hits and 0 when it misses. Base would probably rather it be a Splitter, but there isn't a simple way to make Florist work with that.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [All]
 

Page created in 0.222 seconds with 20 queries.