Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All]

Author Topic: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Results!)  (Read 9493 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
+2

View Results!
View Finalists
View Cards Submitted

This is the eighth contest for this year's set. This week's challenge: Design a Landmark!

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 or Empires 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.
Gathering cards, cards that use Debt, and Split piles may only be submitted as candidates for an Empires 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 #8: Landmark

Design a Landmark that would fit into the Empires expansion. Such a non-card could have one or more of the following qualities:

Gives VP tokens on meeting specific conditions during play.
Starts with or accumulates VP tokens.
Gives VP bonuses or penalties during endgame scoring based on the composition of your deck.

Submissions are due by the end of Thursday, 2016-07-21.
« Last Edit: August 23, 2016, 05:47:42 pm by mith »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #1 on: July 12, 2016, 06:10:31 pm »
0

Dunno about the rest of you, but if I submit anything, I'll have to spend a few minutes re-reading all the official Landmarks to make sure mine isn't too similar.

I feel like balancing concerns are a lot lower and/or easier to solve for Landmarks because each is a single effect that everybody has from the start.  Even if it's major, there's no worry about one player winning the split or anything.  I guess for Landmarks that have a limited number of VP, you have to be careful not to make it such that one player can drain all the VP quickly and easily.  Thoughts from others on this?

Edit: typooooo
« Last Edit: July 13, 2016, 02:27:19 am by eHalcyon »
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #2 on: July 12, 2016, 06:32:33 pm »
0

Dunno about the rest of you, but if I submit anything, I'll have to spend a few minutes re-reading all the official Landmarks to make sure mine isn't to similar.

I feel like balancing concerns are a lot lower and/or easier to solve for Landmarks because each is a single effect that everybody has from the start.  Even if it's major, there's no worry about one player winning the split or anything.  I guess for Landmarks that have a limited number of VP, you have to be careful not to make it such that one player can drain all the VP quickly and easily.  Thoughts from others on this?
I think landmarks come down to how fun they are. Not adding anything is more important than being OP, see rats and fortress with tomb.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #3 on: July 12, 2016, 08:16:30 pm »
0

I remember coming up with an idea for an Event/Landmark a couple of weeks ago, and do you think I can remember what it was? *sigh*
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #4 on: July 12, 2016, 09:26:14 pm »
0

I feel like balancing concerns are a lot lower and/or easier to solve for Landmarks because each is a single effect that everybody has from the start.  Even if it's major, there's no worry about one player winning the split or anything.  I guess for Landmarks that have a limited number of VP, you have to be careful not to make it such that one player can drain all the VP quickly and easily.  Thoughts from others on this?
Sounds like a challenge to make an unbalanced landmark.  ;D
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #5 on: July 13, 2016, 01:42:22 am »
+1

I wouldn't mind it if Landmark were viewed more generally as game-changing perma-event instead of a game-changing perma-event that provides VPs.
It's kinda like with Gathering. Sure, all official Gathering cards accumulate and return VPs but why be so restrictive and don't view a Gathering card more generally as a card that accumulates and returns something .
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #6 on: July 13, 2016, 02:06:29 am »
0

I wouldn't mind it if Landmark were viewed more generally as game-changing perma-event instead of a game-changing perma-event that provides VPs.
It's kinda like with Gathering. Sure, all official Gathering cards accumulate and return VPs but why be so restrictive and don't view a Gathering card more generally as a card that accumulates and returns something .
So, possibly have a Landmark that gives players an additional ability, or that affects turn order, or game end conditions, or something like that? Or maybe something like Mountain Pass, but which lets you bid to gain a card of your choice or something? Personally, I would be in favour of it.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #7 on: July 13, 2016, 02:19:46 am »
0

I wouldn't mind it if Landmark were viewed more generally as game-changing perma-event instead of a game-changing perma-event that provides VPs.
It's kinda like with Gathering. Sure, all official Gathering cards accumulate and return VPs but why be so restrictive and don't view a Gathering card more generally as a card that accumulates and returns something .
So, possibly have a Landmark that gives players an additional ability, or that affects turn order, or game end conditions, or something like that? Or maybe something like Mountain Pass, but which lets you bid to gain a card of your choice or something? Personally, I would be in favour of it.

I'm against it, but only because Donald X. is against it and I think the Treasure Chest contests should stay true to that.  I asked specifically about this shortly after Empires was released:

No guarantees that Gathering cards will ever appear outside of Empires, but should they remain strictly tied to VP?  Gathering with coin tokens seems like an obvious thing that could work.
For me Gathering cards want to be things that Defiled Shrine is specifically dodging putting tokens on. So, cards that put VP tokens on their pile. "Gathering with coin tokens" runs into the problem of interacting with Trade Route, but that aside, would get a different type if it happened.

Same question for Landmarks.
Landmarks are intentionally tied to VP.

You could just make cards that modify the rules. I considered it way back when; it's a thing I've done in many games. I didn't do it because Dominion has kingdom cards filling that rule; they change the rules plenty. Dominion doesn't need other rules-changing cards. I considered it again later and still didn't want them.

But I do have Events and now Landmarks. Events can change the rules, but only via the Event-buying mechanism, which is like buying a card without the card; it felt like a reasonable extension. Landmarks can change the rules, but only in these VP-making ways. While they are each a step towards just having randomizer cards that change the rules, they still both try hard to stay within limits, to only affect the game in a way best done via these mechanisms. In general the best way to change the rules in Dominion is still to have kingdom cards that do different things.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #8 on: July 13, 2016, 02:45:07 am »
0

Interesting, I didn't know that.
I still think that events that change global rules would be better as Landmarks. For example Delve would be mildly simpler if it were a Landmark that said "Silver costs 2$".
On the other hand Landmark does have its green background which implies VPs so Donald's argument definitely makes sense.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #9 on: July 13, 2016, 05:23:21 am »
0

Interesting, I didn't know that.
I still think that events that change global rules would be better as Landmarks. For example Delve would be mildly simpler if it were a Landmark that said "Silver costs 2$".
On the other hand Landmark does have its green background which implies VPs so Donald's argument definitely makes sense.
Silver costs 2 seems more problematic and confusing. I think all landmarks should directly give or take VP. It makes it easier to remember, is there's several green things it would be annoying to sort them out based on what they do.

I'm definetly against this, mainly because Donald has said no.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #10 on: July 13, 2016, 06:17:14 am »
0

Interesting, I didn't know that.
I still think that events that change global rules would be better as Landmarks. For example Delve would be mildly simpler if it were a Landmark that said "Silver costs 2$".
On the other hand Landmark does have its green background which implies VPs so Donald's argument definitely makes sense.
Silver costs 2 seems more problematic and confusing.
"Silver costs 2 instead of 3" is definitely simpler and also interacts with cost reducers. The Event way of Delve to implement it seems slightly less natural to me.

Quote
I think all landmarks should directly give or take VP. It makes it easier to remember, is there's several green things it would be annoying to sort them out based on what they do.

I'm definetly against this, mainly because Donald has said no.
Sure, a perma-Event that changes global rules but doesn't hand out VPs could just be called something else than Landmark or Event.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #11 on: July 13, 2016, 07:05:58 am »
0

Interesting, I didn't know that.
I still think that events that change global rules would be better as Landmarks. For example Delve would be mildly simpler if it were a Landmark that said "Silver costs 2$".
On the other hand Landmark does have its green background which implies VPs so Donald's argument definitely makes sense.
Silver costs 2 seems more problematic and confusing.
"Silver costs 2 instead of 3" is definitely simpler and also interacts with cost reducers. The Event way of Delve to implement it seems slightly less natural to me.

Quote
I think all landmarks should directly give or take VP. It makes it easier to remember, is there's several green things it would be annoying to sort them out based on what they do.

I'm definetly against this, mainly because Donald has said no.
Sure, a perma-Event that changes global rules but doesn't hand out VPs could just be called something else than Landmark or Event.
Don't spoil my project! Shhhh!
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

drsteelhammer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1525
  • Shuffle iT Username: drsteelhammer
  • Respect: +1456
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #12 on: July 14, 2016, 07:28:12 pm »
0

Shoutout to the (totally anonymous) Volcano creator, please submit yours!
Logged
Join the Dominion League!

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

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2016, 10:06:58 am »
0

Shoutout to the (totally anonymous) Volcano creator, please submit yours!
I would not vote for it.

Landmarks are specifically tied to VP, not just cards that might happen to make you lose VP. You don't count Gold as a VP card because it might let you buy a province. The things I want from a landmark are (In order):

1) Specifically gives . Whether when scoring, through tokens, or with curses doesn't matter. But if it just has some effect that might happen to effect your score (Volcano), I'm won't vote for it.
2) Doesn't give too much . If it gives you 10 each time you play an action, then I won't vote for. I don't like when landmarks make the dominant strategy (Rats/Fortress/Tomb).
3) Makes a difference in the game. If it gave 1 for something at the end of the game it would hardly ever make a difference.
4) Isn't to similar to something already done. Giving you 1 each time you buy an action would be to similar to Colonnade and Defiled Shrine.
5) It's not already an outtake. This is self explanatory, if Donald found a good reason not to have then I won't vote for it.

Now that being said, there is still a lot I would like to see from landmarks. Giving you curses automatically, for playing treasures, and more landmarks like tomb all sound interesting.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2016, 10:25:40 am »
0

Shoutout to the (totally anonymous) Volcano creator, please submit yours!
I would not vote for it.
And I'd prevote for it.  8)

Quote
You don't count Gold as a VP card because it might let you buy a province.
Aqueduct disagrees with you.

Quote
5) It's not already an outtake. This is self explanatory, if Donald found a good reason not to have then I won't vote for it.
Not all outtakes totally suck. In the secret history Donald actually tells that some stayed for quite some time during playtesting. For example the Curser that hands out a VP token at the same time could be done as a Landmark. As Cursers are already fairly strong this seems like a good idea to make them slightly less powerful in some games. And if you add a VP restriction per player another dimension opens up, namely that late Curses come without the extra VP but of course you wanna junk your opponent as early as possible.

So, big surprise, a quick sketch of a Landmark based on an outtake (of an Action card)!
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2016, 10:55:00 am »
0

Shoutout to the (totally anonymous) Volcano creator, please submit yours!
I would not vote for it.
And I'd prevote for it.  8)

Quote
You don't count Gold as a VP card because it might let you buy a province.
Aqueduct disagrees with you.

Quote
5) It's not already an outtake. This is self explanatory, if Donald found a good reason not to have then I won't vote for it.
Not all outtakes totally suck. In the secret history Donald actually tells that some stayed for quite some time during playtesting. For example the Curser that hands out a VP token at the same time could be done as a Landmark. As Cursers are already fairly strong this seems like a good idea to make them slightly less powerful in some games. And if you add a VP restriction per player another dimension opens up, namely that late Curses come without the extra VP but of course you wanna junk your opponent as early as possible.

So, big surprise, a quick sketch of a Landmark based on an outtake (of an Action card)!
The basic ideas would work, but an almost word-for-word reproduction is what I am talking about. This is at the bottom of my list so it's not a very high priority. For instance, if "2 for every card costing " came up I would not vote for it.

As for aqueduct, that's an edge case. And even then, you still need to buy a victory card for you to get it. All cards can be counted as VP cards in games with gardens.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2016, 11:50:10 am »
0

4) Isn't to similar to something already done. Giving you 1 each time you buy an action would be to similar to Colonnade and Defiled Shrine.
Quote
You don't count Gold as a VP card because it might let you buy a province.
Aqueduct disagrees with you.
I definitely feel this is a misunderstanding of both Defiled Shrine and Aqueduct.  The player who buys Actions/Gold is not the player who gets the VP.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2016, 12:48:49 pm »
0

4) Isn't to similar to something already done. Giving you 1 each time you buy an action would be to similar to Colonnade and Defiled Shrine.
Quote
You don't count Gold as a VP card because it might let you buy a province.
Aqueduct disagrees with you.
I definitely feel this is a misunderstanding of both Defiled Shrine and Aqueduct.  The player who buys Actions/Gold is not the player who gets the VP.
In hindsight that wasn't the best comparison but I fully understand what both do.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2016, 01:12:16 pm »
+1

I'm so confused about this argument over Aqueduct. It gives you VP, which is what Landmarks do. What's the problem?

Outtakes are a bad idea unless you make a significant change that addresses the reason it was cut. Turning an action into an event or landmark is a very significant change, so it may help.
Logged

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2016, 01:14:41 pm »
0

I'm so confused about this argument over Aqueduct. It gives you VP, which is what Landmarks do. What's the problem?
The debate was mainly whether, in games with aqueduct, you count gold as alt-VP.
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #20 on: July 15, 2016, 01:32:32 pm »
+1

I'm so confused about this argument over Aqueduct. It gives you VP, which is what Landmarks do. What's the problem?
The debate was mainly whether, in games with aqueduct, you count gold as alt-VP.

That doesn't sound like the point in context (and "alt VP" isn't mentioned in the comment chain), but OK. Clearly Gold doesn't count as alt VP with Aqueduct though.
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +412
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2016, 04:05:48 pm »
0

The issue I had with Volcano, which I should probably have raised on its page, is: doesn't it require you to go back in time?

  • Cleanup happens. You discard your hand.
  • Cleanup ends
  • The game ends. Volcano triggers.
  • Now you do stuff differently during cleanup
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #22 on: July 15, 2016, 05:44:05 pm »
0

What's volcano?
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #23 on: July 15, 2016, 06:25:57 pm »
0

What's volcano?

From the discussion, I gather that it is a fan-made Landmark already posted somewhere which doesn't actually give any VP.  Rather, it does something that could potentially cause you to gain or lose VP cards, in the same way that Gold may be used to buy a Province?  That's what it sounds like to me.  If that's the case, then Landmark isn't the right type for it according to official criteria.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #24 on: July 15, 2016, 07:00:55 pm »
0

Volcano trashes your hand if you end the game.  I know which thread it's from, but I'm assuming that nobody's linking it for purposes of a more anonymous contest.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #25 on: July 15, 2016, 07:05:47 pm »
0

Ah, yes, I remember that one.

I actually liked that landmark.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #26 on: July 15, 2016, 07:30:11 pm »
0

I have send in a proposal too. Let's see if it works.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #27 on: July 15, 2016, 08:02:55 pm »
0

Volcano trashes your hand if you end the game.  I know which thread it's from, but I'm assuming that nobody's linking it for purposes of a more anonymous contest.

So yeah, that doesn't fit the official meaning of the "Landmark" typing.  Donald has said that if something like that were made, it would get a new type.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #28 on: July 16, 2016, 02:10:35 am »
0

Doing such a card as perma, non-triggerable Event is awefully artifical so Landmark it is, even if it is not perfectly in line with the implicit "official" rules. I mean, gee, do we want creative or hyperrestrictive fan-cards?
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #29 on: July 16, 2016, 03:33:59 am »
0

Doing such a card as perma, non-triggerable Event is awefully artifical so Landmark it is, even if it is not perfectly in line with the implicit "official" rules. I mean, gee, do we want creative or hyperrestrictive fan-cards?

Again, it would get a new type, not Landmark, not Event.  That's the explicit official answer.  It's worth noting that restrictions breed creativity.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #30 on: July 16, 2016, 04:51:52 am »
0

So events are things we can buy, landmarks are *things that happen* related to vp.

And we want something that is *things that happen* not tied to vp? I think we can have that, but not as landmark, per specifications.

Some silly examples:
- when you buy a card, gain 2 debt.
- when anyone gets a curse during ypur turn, ypu get a copper.
- when buying silver, it costs $2
- when you play an attack card, gain a copper

Or bunch of silly things. I just wonder if we can find things that are worth it. Admittedly, I think volcano is cool. I still think volcano can be a landmark, although it's a long shot, but since it can trash vp and since it will make you care about what you do specifically related to vp, I think it works. I mean: isn't the beauty of volcano that it is a tied to vp decision making without mentioning vp at all?
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #31 on: July 16, 2016, 05:25:08 am »
0

So events are things we can buy, landmarks are *things that happen* related to vp.

And we want something that is *things that happen* not tied to vp? I think we can have that, but not as landmark, per specifications.

Some silly examples:
- when you buy a card, gain 2 debt.
- when anyone gets a curse during ypur turn, ypu get a copper.
- when buying silver, it costs $2
- when you play an attack card, gain a copper

Or bunch of silly things. I just wonder if we can find things that are worth it. Admittedly, I think volcano is cool. I still think volcano can be a landmark, although it's a long shot, but since it can trash vp and since it will make you care about what you do specifically related to vp, I think it works. I mean: isn't the beauty of volcano that it is a tied to vp decision making without mentioning vp at all?

Except it's not specific to VP.  Landmarks are tied to VP, either being conditionally worth VP itself (positive or negative) or providing VP tokens.  "Game ender trashes hand" has no inherent VP value.  It's incidental.  As ThetaSigma said earlier, it's as related to VP as Gold is related to VP (because, hey, you can use Gold to buy a Province).

Also, not sure if intentional but two of the "silly" things on your list already exist as Events -- Tax and Delve.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #32 on: July 16, 2016, 12:33:49 pm »
0

So events are things we can buy, landmarks are *things that happen* related to vp.

And we want something that is *things that happen* not tied to vp? I think we can have that, but not as landmark, per specifications.

Some silly examples:
- when you buy a card, gain 2 debt.
- when anyone gets a curse during ypur turn, ypu get a copper.
- when buying silver, it costs $2
- when you play an attack card, gain a copper

Or bunch of silly things. I just wonder if we can find things that are worth it. Admittedly, I think volcano is cool. I still think volcano can be a landmark, although it's a long shot, but since it can trash vp and since it will make you care about what you do specifically related to vp, I think it works. I mean: isn't the beauty of volcano that it is a tied to vp decision making without mentioning vp at all?

Except it's not specific to VP.  Landmarks are tied to VP, either being conditionally worth VP itself (positive or negative) or providing VP tokens.  "Game ender trashes hand" has no inherent VP value.  It's incidental.  As ThetaSigma said earlier, it's as related to VP as Gold is related to VP (because, hey, you can use Gold to buy a Province).

Also, not sure if intentional but two of the "silly" things on your list already exist as Events -- Tax and Delve.

Yes, you have already said that. I can also repeat my point on why I do like it and why, even though it doesn't have 'VP' written on it, there is still a very close link to VP-decision making. But well, that would be redundant, wouldn't it?
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #33 on: July 16, 2016, 02:18:01 pm »
0

Yes, you have already said that. I can also repeat my point on why I do like it and why, even though it doesn't have 'VP' written on it, there is still a very close link to VP-decision making. But well, that would be redundant, wouldn't it?

I like it too, but it still doesn't fit.  Sorry if it seemed redundant, but I was responding to the last line about the beauty of it being closely tied to VP.  What I'm saying is, it isn't.  The link to VP decision-making is the same general link that everything in Dominion has, from Gold (it makes money so you can buy VP!) to Workshop (it gives +Buy so you can buy multiple VP cards on the same turn!).

Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #34 on: July 16, 2016, 02:25:16 pm »
0

I don't think the analogy holds up, but you can be of that opinion.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #35 on: July 16, 2016, 03:46:54 pm »
+2

There are a few existing landmarks which do more than just change scores.  Mountain Pass lets you take debt.  Arena lets you discard a card.  There are some edge cases where this can allow you to do something different in the middle of the game (e.g. pay off debt, buy Villa, play Storyteller).

Volcano, on the other hand, does not allow you to do anything different during the game, because it only does something at the very end.  I don't agree with the argument that Volcano's effect on VP is only incidental, because VP is literally the only thing Volcano can affect.  So I think Volcano could count as a landmark for purposes of this contest.

That said, I'm not a fan.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #36 on: July 16, 2016, 03:53:28 pm »
0

There are a few existing landmarks which do more than just change scores.  Mountain Pass lets you take debt.  Arena lets you discard a card.  There are some edge cases where this can allow you to do something different in the middle of the game (e.g. pay off debt, buy Villa, play Storyteller).

Volcano, on the other hand, does not allow you to do anything different during the game, because it only does something at the very end.  I don't agree with the argument that Volcano's effect on VP is only incidental, because VP is literally the only thing Volcano can affect.  So I think Volcano could count as a landmark for purposes of this contest.

That said, I'm not a fan.

I think you have worded in a better way why I like it: it affects VP (and is literally completely tied to vp-decision making) without it actually mentioning vp, but like you said it only affects vp in one way or another, either by directly potentially trashing a province, or indirectly by trashing those cards you needed for gardens or whatever.

You don't like it. That's fair; but it's cool that it's so closely tied to vp's, without mentioning it. I see eHalcyon's point about: 'yes, it's not specific about vp', but I can only interpret this as: 'it doesn't mention vp'. Well, I think it doesn't need to mention vp to have an effect that is powerful and only influenced by vp. That's why I am not a huge fan of the 'ow, it's like gold that allows you to buy vp or not'. This can only affect vp, by the very nature of how it's designed. You will play completely different, because you can loose vp. You will make your engine completely different, because when the game ends, something radically different will happen that will only affect your vp. If it does all that, without mentioning vp specifically, isn't that a thing of beauty?

Let me ask this: is there an idea that will have such a large affect on vp without mentioning vp, that only will affect vp creation? I can't imagine one, to be honest. Rather than denouncing this landmark, I think we should celebrate it as a stroke of pure genius.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #37 on: July 16, 2016, 03:58:14 pm »
0

Again, to clarify, it affects VP cards, but doesn't do anything with VP itself.  That's the difference.  All the Landmarks are themselves worth VP or they give VP tokens.

A way to make it work would be to translate it to its own VP, maybe.  Something like, "The first time an end game condition is met, the current player reveals their hand; each other player gets +3VP per Victory card revealed".  I think this would also solve that "time travel" problem that was mentioned earlier, which is a pretty big deal. 
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #38 on: July 16, 2016, 04:00:39 pm »
0

Again, to clarify, it affects VP cards, but doesn't do anything with VP itself.  That's the difference.  All the Landmarks are themselves worth VP or they give VP tokens.


I find this of minor importance, tbh, relative to benefits it has of what the card does. Wolfden, btw, is slightly different: it removes vp. Volcano also removes vp in a very specific way: by removing vp cards from your deck.

Suppose volcano says: 'when you end the game, all vp-providing cards in your hand are subtracted from your total'. Is that really that different from wolf den?
« Last Edit: July 16, 2016, 04:22:02 pm by AdrianHealey »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #39 on: July 16, 2016, 04:39:34 pm »
0

Again, to clarify, it affects VP cards, but doesn't do anything with VP itself.  That's the difference.  All the Landmarks are themselves worth VP or they give VP tokens.


I find this of minor importance, tbh, relative to benefits it has of what the card does. Wolfden, btw, is slightly different: it removes vp. Volcano also removes vp in a very specific way: by removing vp cards from your deck.

Suppose volcano says: 'when you end the game, all vp-providing cards in your hand are subtracted from your total'. Is that really that different from wolf den?

Yes, I think there's a difference between Wolf Den being worth a specific -VP value vs. Volcano removing actual cards from your deck.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #40 on: July 17, 2016, 11:17:31 am »
0

Volcano destroys Victory cards so it makes total sense to call it Landmark. If Cookielord had invented a new category just for one card the rule lawyer faction would have nitpicked it to death as well without actually caring one iota about whether the idea of the card is good or bad.

Delve is extremely artifical and would make more sense as a global permaevent:
"Silver costs 1$ less"

Now whether you call this Event or Landmark or whatever doesn't matter at all. But global perma-events beyond mere VP token handing out stuff is definitely something interesting and there is obvious more design potential in such a more general category as the particular stuff about VP tokens is already covered by Landmarks. There might some good ideas left but Donald has probably already covered the best via Landmarks.

Gathering is something similar. I see no reason to restrict this to VP tokens, you can also do stuff with Coin tokens or whatever else comes to mind.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 11:19:28 am by tristan »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #41 on: July 17, 2016, 02:47:25 pm »
0

Chapel trashes Estates but it doesn't make sense to call it a Victory card.

Again with the Rules Lawyer strawman.

Donald gave a very specific reason why Gathering wouldn't be used for coin tokens. That should be reason enough.

Also, people weren't naming the creator of Volcano for a reason. Would have been nice for you to respect that.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2016, 02:51:44 pm by eHalcyon »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #42 on: July 17, 2016, 03:06:04 pm »
0

Just to be totally clear -- I have nothing against the idea non-VP Landmarks in general.  On the contrary, I think it's a fantastic idea, and it's part of the reason why I asked Donald about it in the first place.  Even now, I hope he changes his mind and releases non-VP Landmarks in the future.  I look forward to seeing fan card ideas like Volcano in the future, whether it's billed as a Landmark or not.

But in the context of this Treasure Chest contest, I believe 100% that we should follow the type definitions set out by Donald X.  We're designing cards that are supposed to fit in the official sets, so we should really follow the map set by the game designer himself.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #43 on: July 17, 2016, 03:39:52 pm »
0

Chapel trashes Estates but it doesn't make sense to call it a Victory card.
Bullcrap. Volcano potentially trashes Victory cards at the very last turn of the game which has nothing at all to do with early game deck thinning via CHapel.
Volcano is about the potential downside of ending the game with Victory cards in your hand as they are then trashed. So it provides negative VPs and the green background of Landmark, signaling that this has something to do with VPs, is totally justified.

Anyway, this discussion is pointless. I could point out ample of times why global perma-events should not be implemented via events like Delve which feels awefully artificial and instead be either included in the Landmark category (creating a new category for global perma-events seems contrived as well) without getting any reaction from you besides "Donald said so".
Same with Gathering. The idea is neat and there is zero reason to implement in a hyperrestrictive "only VPs" way (especially not in the case of fan cards which will never be sold or publically released or whatever but only, in the best case, printed by a bunch of Dominion freaks like us).
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #44 on: July 17, 2016, 03:48:00 pm »
0

Read my last post.

Delve is fine.  Doesn't seem artificial to me at all.  It also has some significant differences from a general "Silver now costs $2" rule.

And since you can't seem to find the part for Gathering, here:


No guarantees that Gathering cards will ever appear outside of Empires, but should they remain strictly tied to VP?  Gathering with coin tokens seems like an obvious thing that could work.
For me Gathering cards want to be things that Defiled Shrine is specifically dodging putting tokens on. So, cards that put VP tokens on their pile. "Gathering with coin tokens" runs into the problem of interacting with Trade Route, but that aside, would get a different type if it happened.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #45 on: July 17, 2016, 03:50:41 pm »
0

I think the ultimate judge is the organizer of this competion. Mith, can we have a ruling here?
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #46 on: July 17, 2016, 03:53:45 pm »
0

Read my last post.

Delve is fine.  Doesn't seem artificial to me at all.  It also has some significant differences from a general "Silver now costs $2" rule.

And since you can't seem to find the part for Gathering, here:


No guarantees that Gathering cards will ever appear outside of Empires, but should they remain strictly tied to VP?  Gathering with coin tokens seems like an obvious thing that could work.
For me Gathering cards want to be things that Defiled Shrine is specifically dodging putting tokens on. So, cards that put VP tokens on their pile. "Gathering with coin tokens" runs into the problem of interacting with Trade Route, but that aside, would get a different type if it happened.
Donald naturally knows a shit load about Dominion as he designed it but he ain't God. Interacting with Trade Route is hardly an issue, you simply use another token for Trade Route.
I don't care about how you call cards that put Coin tokens or other stuff on cards. Personally I am fine with Gathering and use the wording for one of my cards as too many types is too confusing IMO.

About this "competition", of course it should use the official rules. The general fan card forum is for stuff that is not restricted by individual expansions.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #47 on: July 17, 2016, 04:00:58 pm »
0

Donald naturally knows a shit load about Dominion as he designed it but he ain't God. Interacting with Trade Route is hardly an issue, you simply use another token for Trade Route.
I don't care about how you call cards that put Coin tokens or other stuff on cards. Personally I am fine with Gathering and use the wording for one of my cards as too many types is too confusing IMO.

It's not just Trade Route either though.  Using the Gathering type means that Defiled Shrine is dodging a card it doesn't need to dodge.

If you don't care, then there's no reason not to use a new subtype.  I mean, there are subtypes just for Knights and Castles and it's perfectly understandable.

About this "competition", of course it should use the official rules. The general fan card forum is for stuff that is not restricted by individual expansions.

Then I don't know why you're even arguing.  Did you not notice which thread and subforum this is?
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 8: Landmark
« Reply #48 on: July 18, 2016, 11:05:55 am »
0

I think the ultimate judge is the organizer of this competion. Mith, can we have a ruling here?

I am inclined to agree that, given the official statement on the Landmark type, only cards tied to VP should be submitted. The intent of the contest is to design a card which would fit with the existing official cards.

(That said, we have had cards submitted which did not fit the theme of the contest - I will continue to include such cards in the voting, and leave it up to the voters to determine whether the card fits or not.)
Logged

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5534
  • Shuffle iT Username: Seprix
  • Respect: +3481
    • View Profile
    • The Border Village
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #49 on: July 18, 2016, 12:45:17 pm »
0

How could there be a Landmark card without it being involved with VP?
Logged
Don't let this one slip, or you could be going to military school.

Join Dominion Discord

Fragasnap

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 285
  • Respect: +420
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2016, 09:44:03 pm »
0

How could there be a Landmark card without it being involved with VP?
If we want to be technical, all Landmark cards do is change the rules, with many adding on an additional effect that occurs to all players "when scoring" and all the others adding an additional rule that allows players to score VPs. Tomb is effectively "[In games using this,] when you trash a card, +1VP": The fact that it involves VP is purely circumstantial.
I would say that slapping any "in games using this" effect onto a Landmark card would be totally within bounds of the rules (much like cards that stay out for more than 2 turns like Archive and Hireling are still Duration cards), even though no such card currently exists. Just the same, I cannot think of such a card that would get my vote.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #51 on: July 19, 2016, 12:08:05 am »
0

I do not discount the opinion that Landmarks should be VP-related, and certainly the argument that we are trying to make a Treasure Chest that "fits" with the existing expansions would definitely preference such a Landmark. That said, I really hope to see at least a couple of entries that introduce some other kind of global rule change (e.g. at the end of the first full turn, have a bid for turn order), if only to see what kind of design space opens up. If nothing else, then those ideas can then be floated in some other venue and judged on their own merits, if the group consensus is that VP-related Landmarks are the way to go.
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 8: Landmark
« Reply #52 on: July 22, 2016, 03:55:03 pm »
0

Revised deadline is Monday.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4795
  • Respect: +5119
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #53 on: July 25, 2016, 05:47:14 pm »
+2

Curious what will come out of this contest.

Also, i just noticed that Arena would have worked perfectly well as an Event (with a Setup, but Tax has one, too).

Seprix

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5534
  • Shuffle iT Username: Seprix
  • Respect: +3481
    • View Profile
    • The Border Village
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #54 on: July 25, 2016, 05:52:28 pm »
0

Good luck to everyone.
Logged
Don't let this one slip, or you could be going to military school.

Join Dominion Discord

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #55 on: July 26, 2016, 12:24:51 am »
+2

I am very excited to see the submissions. Both because I think there's a lot of interesting directions to take it, and because I want my "unread posts" to have more Dominion discussion in it than political discussion.
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 8: Landmark
« Reply #56 on: July 26, 2016, 11:32:13 am »
+3

Submissions are closed. I will definitely* get them up today sometime.

*probably
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 8: Landmark
« Reply #57 on: July 27, 2016, 05:24:58 pm »
+1

Sorry all, I've got a sinus/ear infection thing going now. The joys of parenthood, I've been sick so many times this year...
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #58 on: July 27, 2016, 05:27:56 pm »
+1

No problem!

The offer to help you still stands, btw. :)
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 8: Landmark
« Reply #59 on: July 28, 2016, 07:07:09 pm »
+5

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #60 on: July 28, 2016, 08:39:27 pm »
+1

Yay! Here we go!

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.
I like this! It encapsulates the idea of a Landmark well. But, um, it's kind of an invalid entry, since it uses Ruins.

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.
Kind of interesting, although it punishes you for not being thorough in your trashing which is weird - so if someone's managed to clean out a couple of Curses but you didn't get to trash your last one, that's a paddlin'. I suppose it's an incentive to throw a few engine pieces in the trash in the hopes of catching your opponent out.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.
Aaaaaaaaaand this is kind of amusing. I guess it was inevitable people would try to make the old "VP for trash" chestnut work, and the symmetry between this and Burial Grounds is cute. I think this side is better, since it encourages middling trashing - it's kind of a Dark Ages/Cornucopia crossover Landmark.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.
And this is in a similar vein, except (a) it keeps the cards face down so you don't necessarily know what will score which might be a bit unpopular, and (b) it provides a mechanism to do so. Having what amounts to "trash a card every turn" might be a bit too crazy.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.
Personally, I'd name this "Monolith". A bit annoying to work out scores for, but otherwise quite straight forward. I guess it has the problem that you can essentially tank another player's score by buying a single card from each pile, which could be quite mean.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.
I'm not sure if I'd enjoy the kind of games this would encourage. I'm not saying it's bad, I'm just not sure.

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.
Cute. You'd probably want to cash in those VP almost all the time that it would let you spike, but then sometimes you'd get down to about 6 tokens and you'd have to decide whether to hoard them or go for broke. Sounds fun.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.
In some games, this will presumably result in some crazy pile-driving, especially if there's a Workshop-variant around. In others, it will be a bit meh. But I suppose that's true of a few official Landmarks, too.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.
Uh, what? So in other words, if the game ends on Provinces or Colonies, then said Provinces and Colonies become rubbish (and heaven forbid you picked up a Farmlands). Which encourages three-pile endings in a crazy way. Probably too much of a penalty.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.
Again, trying to make the trash worth something. If nothing else, it makes Duchies a little bit better, which can have some neat effects, and in a game with decent trashing it probably usually makes Copper worth a point. Possibly the most interesting case would be in those rare games where there's only non-Copper trashing (e.g. JoaT, or even Salt the Earth) and you start with Shelters so there's little incentive to have Estates at any point. This is probably not terrible.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.
Eh, feels like a less interesting Aqueduct, I think. First two Province gains are guaranteed an extra 2 VP each, which is nice for the BM player.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
So, it discourages draw-your-deck engines? Ok, I guess. I suppose it has its place.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.
Seems like it would be hard to track. Does something like playing a card and then choosing to not do its "You may" effect count? Or is it only something like playing a Throne Room with no other cards in hand?

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
Rewards unusual shuffle-timing. I do like that.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
Rewards BM, of course. Also nice for a Counting House board. Will possibly result in some boring games (and makes a 5/2 opening even more appealing on some boards).

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.
Very nice when you wind up with too much cash and not enough Buys. I think this one will make for some very interesting decisions.

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.
Eh? I'm not hugely excited by this one.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.
This could probably best be accomplished by some kind of token, but like Golden Isles I like having a limited opportunity to exchange VP for a game advantage.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.
I read the card, then I read the name, and I smiled. I like that it essentially has a floor of 0, and it interacts with other sources of VP tokens in ways that don't already exist, so I do like this one.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #61 on: July 28, 2016, 08:44:16 pm »
0

In general, I'm pretty impressed with these landmarks.  I think they're much easier to balance than other card-shaped thingies so a lot of them end up looking good.  There... are a few that I might downvote for not being pure landmarks, although I do like the ideas nonetheless.  :)

Comments on selected landmarks:
Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.
As someone who loves slogs, I like the idea a lot.  Downside is that it promotes big money or mirroring pretty hard, especially early on.  I think the VP bonus could afford to be more drastic.  You probably still want to trash those ruins as much as possible.

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.
Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.
LOL, two similar ideas with similar names.  However, the similarity may be deceptive, since +3VP is completely different from -3VP.  Burial Grounds encourages you to trash cards that only your opponents have, while Burial Mounds encourages you to trash cards that only you have.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.
Oh my, trashing with zero opportunity cost.  Of course everybody gets it, so maybe it works?  But this is like Donate levels of crazy.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.
Aqueduct and Defiled Shrine are two of my favorite landmarks, because they create an auction encouraging you to junk your deck early on.  Deep Mine is a brilliant variation on the theme.  Unlike Aqueduct and Defiled Shrine, Deep Mine has more impact in the mid- and late-game.  There are also a lot more situations where taking the VP from Deep Mine more costly to some players than to others, whereas taking the VP from Aqueduct or Defiled Shrine tends to be equally costly for all players.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.
Wow, this landmark doesn't play around.  So obviously you go for duchies, but then the game will end on piles and you should have gotten provinces.  No, you go for provinces, and then switch to duchies?  No, you let your opponent go for provinces while you get duchies, and then you end it on provinces?  This is confusing, in a good way.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.
After gushing about Deep Mine above, I'm more lukewarm on this card.  Being forced to skip your actions, or buy a curse, now that's gonna cost you.  But buying a province?  I wanted to do that anyway.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.
Well there are a lot of rules questions.  For instance what if I play a smithy but there are no cards left in my deck?  Or if I trash a copper with Upgrade and there are no poor houses?  Or if I want to take a VP from Sacrificial Cenote, but I ran out of physical VP chips?  It's kind of weird to think about all the different times this might trigger.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.
This seems powerful enough that you'd just build golden decks with it all the time.  But you're draining piles in the process, so it guarantees a game end.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.
Unless that extra action is upgrading an estate into a province, it seems hard to justify. :P

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.
This rewards you for having a large deck and/or poor draw.  It seems to be targeted at all those deck-drawing engines, which is fair.  If deck-drawing is a dominant strategy, then punishing it can lead to interesting things.  The VP reward could be made stronger though.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 08:46:31 pm by trivialknot »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4795
  • Respect: +5119
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #62 on: July 28, 2016, 08:57:28 pm »
+1

Yay! Landmarks. Some creative stuff here :)
One of these is by me.

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.
Thematically funny, but kind of random. I'm not really sure how the scoring works, either - if i have two Ruined Villages and a Ruined Library, do i receive 3+1 VP? That's how i'd read it. Overall, i'd say it goes too much in the direction of playing a second game inside Dominion for me. Also, if there's a small selection of good openers, the first player advantage irks me.

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.
Pretty creative. It's also good the Landmark only counts each differently named card, as otherwise this could really mess up Curses and VP cards.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.
I didn't know you could place two Landmarks in this contest? Pretty much the same as the one above, possibly even a bit sweeter.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.
Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.
Meh, i don't like how this anables pseudo-Copper trashing. Or Estates that cost $0, for that matter. Nice idea, but i'm not really sold on this one.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.
Another creative one. Although i'm not sure how interesting it is in games with two players: If your opponent goes with another strategy, you both receive points, and if he goes with the same, none of you does. Of course there's also "buy unique cards for VP", but we already have that with Museum. In multiplayer games, the lack of symmetry will probably change the dynamic a bit, though i'm still not sure 1 VP is that much. Sure, it scales if you got lots of Scouts, but even then any player can screw you up just by "pseudo-contesting" you with one copy. Not so sure on this one.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.
Not sure what to say here. It's pretty much asking you to play Big Money, plus Events, maybe?

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.
I think this would have been fine without the scoring part. If i have 2 VP, i make 1 VP by spending one VP? Okay... I guess the Scoring part here is mainly a means to have this qualify as a Landmark. All in all, i think this would have been fine as an Event (cost $0, once per turn: +1 Buy, +$1, each other player takes +1VP) and shouldn't be a Landmark.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.
This will be a shame to have if there are no $3-Actions in the kingdom. Also why doesn't it just say "Silver"? It's okay, though.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.
Okay, so basically it's impossible to win by just buying all the Provinces. To actually receive their points, you need to cause a three pile. I'm not sure why the wording doesn't just say "Province", or maybe even "Province or Colony". Maybe the author didn't want Nobles or Harems in his brave new world. It's interesting and creative, though.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.
I think the wording is a bit off and should be "When scoring, 1 VP per copy you have of the card that has the most copies in the trash." I like the setup clause.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.
Not sure why "non gathering" should be specified, as no Gathering card has the VP type, but well, fan cards probably exist... It's funny how this does the opposite of the two before and pushes Provinces. Not exactly interesting to me, though - i mean, sure, it's going to stop certain alt-VP strategies, but those aren't what usually happens either way. Pushing Province just doesn't feel necessary to me.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
Should obviously consider multiplayer games instead of mentioning "your opponent". Also, i really think this should use the Windfall wording to consider set-aside cards, cards on Islands or Tavern Mats, etc.. Apart from that, it's perfectly fine.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.
Meh, too unclear. If i play a Smithy and only draw 2 cards because my deck is empty, do i get +1VP? Also, it's not limited in how many you get, which will allow Golden decks if you just find a card to abuse. Like, playing 4 Royal Carriages and then playing Throne Room 5 times...

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
This is weird. I get giving points for shuffling, or not shuffling, but giving points for just barely not triggering a shuffle is a bit arbitrary to me. In many games, you won't even have a way to influence this.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
Another big money one... Which also rewards $5/$2 openings, something i don't really like. It's okay-ish, but not too interesting.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.
So, i get the debt in addition to paying the price, right? I guess that's okay. Of course, this would again just as well work as an Event: "$5<5>, +3VP, Gain a card costing up to $5."

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.
Okay, just pushing the game towards smaller VP cards. It's good this is only one VP, but Estate being worth half as much as Duchy and Duchy being worth more than half of a Province will probably make a pretty big effect. This isn't as innocent as it first seems, i think. It's also a bit similar to Battlefield, but then that one only stays for a while and allows you to trash your Estates immediately. Reminds me of the Greed expansion, which had a card that did this.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.
Kind of cute. I mean, i'm not sure it fits as well into the restrictions of Landmarks, but it certainly doesn't work as an Event. I like it.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP
Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.
Meh. I think instead of giving -1VP, it should just give everyone else +1VP, to avoid the unfortunate interaction with VP-token cards. Other than that, it's a bit similar to Rally in that it punishes drawing a lot of your deck.

Edited the messed up quote at the end.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #63 on: July 28, 2016, 09:10:38 pm »
+3

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
I just realised that the entire point of this card is to enable a Chancellor Golden Deck. I don't know if that's stupid or genius.
Logged

math

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
  • Respect: +175
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #64 on: July 28, 2016, 09:23:43 pm »
+1

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.

This seems like a lot of work for too little VP payoff; I'd be likely to trash the Ruins anyway.  The most they can be worth is 3 VP per copy, and you don't want free Duchies in your deck at the start of the game.  It does have a second-player-advantage effect like Tax, but I think this is too large a penalty, especially when it only affects Kingdom piles.

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Were these two submitted by the same person, or by two people collaborating?  If not, that's a weird coincidence that they have extremely similar names and exactly opposite effects.  It's an interesting effect, but Burial Grounds is a little too close to Wolf Den for my liking, and its effect would be minimal - you want to trash all your Copper and Estates anyways.  Burial Mounds affects the game more in terms of strategy; that last Copper is also worth 3 points now, so you might not want to trash it.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.

This is interesting, but I'm not a fan of "global rules change" effects on Landmarks, and this seems more like that than a VP boost.  The VP on this card will have almost no effect in most games; you'll just use it for the free trashing.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.

This is an outtake (see the Secret History for Museum).  Also, it doesn't seem to have much of an effect unless you get an entire pile.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.

Interesting idea.  This is essentially a boost to non-engine strategies, but it's a small one; most engines would be happy to give their opponents 1 VP per turn.  In an engine mirror, this would get interesting; when there is 5-6 VP on the pile, you start considering doing nothing on your turn to take it.  I don't like the fact that the VP on the Province pile has nothing to do with Provinces, but that's just a thematic issue. 

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.

This could antisynergize with other Empires cards that give VP, since it gives you points for not having VP tokens.  On the other hand, if the game lasts long enough, you could use those other VP tokens for money - but by then you'll probably want the VP more, and it's only once per turn.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.

This feels too much like Obelisk for $3 actions.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

I really like this one.  It seems a bit game-warping, but that's normal for Landmarks (see Fountain, Keep, and Wall).  If you have Provinces, you want a 3-pile ending, but if you are buying a bunch of Action cards you can't buy Provinces.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

This doesn't need the setup rule; cards get trashed in most games.  Also, the VP bonus is much too small.  You don't want to keep your Copper even if it's worth 1 VP.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.

This seems a bit quirky.  It could easily break Duchy dances in Big Money, and it makes Duchies worth 5VP in an engine.  It's a cool idea.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Most engines would be happy to give 1VP per turn to a non-engine player, and you can get around this by not drawing the last card or two.  It would need rules clarification - if I play Warehouse and draw the last three cards, can you take 1VP before I discard?  What if you forget?  The wording is also unclear; the way it's worded could mean that this only works once per game.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.

This would need way too many rules clarifications.  What if I play a Great Hall (or any draw card) when I have no cards left in my deck?  What if I play Hunting Party, draw a card, and then have a copy in my hand of each unique card in my deck?  What if I play a Miser, choose to put a Copper onto my mat, and don't have any Coppers in my hand?  What if I play Sage and don't find a card costing $3 or more?  What if I play a Minion and get +$2, doing nothing to the other players?  What if I play a Fortune Teller and the top card of my opponent's deck is an Estate?  What if I play a Band of Misfits and there are no Action cards left costing $4 or less?  What if I play a King's Court with no Action cards in my hand?  What if I play a Ruined Library with my -1 Card token on my deck?  What if I play an Ironworks and then reveal a Trader to gain a Silver instead?  What if I trash a Squire and there are no Attack cards in the Supply?  It's way too complicated to work.

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

This could be interesting.  Deck-draw engines would need a way to discard cards from hand, but those are fairly common.  Big Money strategies would have a harder time, but buying cantrips could help.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

I like this one.  Empires has a Prosperity-type theme, and this rewards decks that can play multiple Treasures per turn.  It actually helps engines almost as much as Big Money, although terminal draw BM will like it.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

I like this one.  I would like it better with a limit to the number of VP you can get from it, but it's great as it is.

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.

Meh, a bit boring.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

This is weird.  How can you track whether or not you've used it?  Why can't you just take the VP at the end of the turn?  Other than that, I like it.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.

In an engine, this antisynergizes with many other Empires cards, since you will have to return the VP they give you.  Donald mentioned that problem in the last Empires landmark outtake.
Logged

math

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
  • Respect: +175
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #65 on: July 28, 2016, 09:29:33 pm »
0

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

I just realized that this Landmark provides the first possible way to get Potion-Debt (by buying Possession).
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1177
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +903
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #66 on: July 28, 2016, 11:06:40 pm »
0

- Yeah, it's pretty funny that we got "Burial Grounds" and "Burial Mounds" with the exact opposite effect (they are even worded in opposite ways). Also agree the Burial Mounds is better (which seems to be the concensus so far).

- Archaeologist might be kind of neat (actually I've been going back and forth in my head about whether it would be fun at all, but at least currently I've settled on the opinion that it looks fun). Unfortunately, as ConMan pointed out, it breaks the rules of the contest, so no go.

-Cenotaph would work much better as an event with a cheap cost to put a card under it. I don't think it works well as a landmark.

- I'm undecided about Golden Isles. I like the idea, but I really don't like the "when scoring..." line. I think it could still qualify as a landmark without it because of the Setup VP.

- I think New World may as well say "In games using this, the game only ends if three piles are empty (and not nessesarily when the province or colony pile is empty)." (Although it could be fun to use as-is with Provinces and Ritual...)

- I like Ossuary, but I think it would be better if the VP bonus was 2. (Of course then it has the not-unlikely possibility of changing curses into estates as long as you trash a certain numbr of them, which isn't nesessarily a bad thing, but it might be better to exclude curses anyway.)

- Plains: I agree with Asper that there's no need to boost Provinces.

- Sacrificial Cenote: There's a good idea in there somewhere, but I agree with others that it's way too vague as-is.

- Swamp isn't one of my favorites here, but I do like that it penalizes strategies that focus on VP chips.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 11:08:14 pm by LibraryAdventurer »
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #67 on: July 29, 2016, 01:09:25 am »
0

I disagree with above that Ossuary should be 2 VP.  I think more often than not, the most common card in the trash will be copper.  You probably don't want a landmark that gives 2 VP for each copper, coppers aren't that much fun.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #68 on: July 29, 2016, 01:24:01 am »
0

I disagree with above that Ossuary should be 2 VP.  I think more often than not, the most common card in the trash will be copper.  You probably don't want a landmark that gives 2 VP for each copper, coppers aren't that much fun.
I agree. Not to mention, there's already a Landmark that gives you points for having lots of Copper, in addition to Gardens which is approximately points-for-Copper too.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #69 on: July 29, 2016, 04:18:03 am »
+1

I didn't submit anything to this one!  Didn't have any ideas... except I do now that I'm reading these entries. D'oh.

Hadn't read others' comments before writing mine.  I didn't consider whether the Landmark would be better as an Event, but I intend to do that before voting.

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.

It's interesting, but Ruins aren't part of Empires.  (Also it messes with the size of the Ruins pile in 6p games, but 6p is terrible anyway so I guess that's fine.)

Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.

My first impression is that this could cost a lot of points just from minor bad luck, like maybe you Chapel down but just have one Copper hanging around.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Funny, this works the other way around from Burial Grounds.  And they rhyme.  Did the submitters plan this?  I like this version, because bad luck doesn't cost you points.  On the contrary, the player gets to make the choice to (for example) keep an extra Copper for the points.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.

I like this one.  Free "trashing" is an interesting rules change, and it can add some tension even if all players are keeping track of the score.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.

I appreciate the basic idea, but I don't think it would work well in practice.  It can get political, and either it makes little impact (everyone has at least one copy of all the relevant cards) or it makes scoring tedious as you double check that you really were the only one who bought Scout.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.

It should use "you" to be consistent with other Landmarks.  As written, it doesn't say who takes the VP. :P

While it's cute that you activate by playing actions and then collect by not playing actions, I'm not sure if it would be fun... I guess the hope is that it creates a game of chicken where two engines keep adding VP until somebody cuts their engine to grab the VP?  I don't like that it discourages playing actions, but I guess Baths is very similar.

It kind of bugs me that the VP are put on the Province pile but have nothing to do with Provinces.  Also not sure why it has 8VP + 2VP per player instead of the standard 6VP per player.

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.

The correct pronoun would help here too: "Once per turn, you may return 1 VP token for +$1".  Doesn't seem necessary to restrict to the Buy phase.

The 2VP clause seems like superfluous complexity.  The only difference it makes is if you have exactly 1VP token, you get +2VP.  Well, it should also get you +2VP if you have no VP tokens, but that can just be added to the first part (i.e. 6VP if you have no VP tokens).

Overall, I think the basic idea is interesting but the way it works strikes me as un-Landmark-like somehow.  I dunno.  Maybe it's just all the extra complexity that I suggested removing.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.

Weird.  I don't know how this would play out.  That's probably a good thing.  I guess it would be highly dependent on what $3 cards are available.  Maybe too similar to Obelisk though?

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

I do not like how much this nerfs Provinces and even alt VP like Fairgrounds or Nobles.  It sounds like this would awkwardly and artificially lead to 3-pile endings.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

The wording needs some work, but I think the idea is cool.  I especially appreciate the setup trashing, so this Event is relevant even on boards with no trashing.  In fact, if Burial Mounds wins, I'd like to see it get the same setup clause.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.

The obvious comparisons are Aqueduct and Defiled Shrine.  Aqueduct moves VP for Treasure; Shrine moves it for action cards; Plains move for Victory cards.  I'm OK with that, but the specific numbers here mean that Plains adds much less potential VP than the official two.

Aqueduct VP is claimed by gaining any VP card; Shrine VP is claimed by buying a Curse; Plains VP is claimed by gaining a Province.  It's worth noting that the conditions for the official Landmarks is easy to achieve, so you can pretty much always take the VP whenever you want.  Plains, however, is not as easy to hit, so there's some extra luck there.

Two other things worth noting: VP is less likely to build up on Plains, because Provinces are usually gained before Duchies or Estates.  If you get into Duchy dancing, this does some weird stuff by buffing the next Province buy and I'm not sure if that's a good thing.  It also weakens alt VP, which I think would make games less interesting overall.

With all that in mind, I think Aqueduct and Defiled Shrine cover this general concept well enough already.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

What about on various mats?

Seriously though, I don't think this Landmark would impact a game much.  Drawing your deck is so powerful that it's probably worth giving up the 1VP every turn you do it.  Maybe if it was the standard 2VP instead?  Or more?  Still not sure though.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.

I feel like this would create lots of rules questions for not a lot of gain, because "doing nothing" and "prevented from having its printed effect" are not well defined.  Obvious situations where it's intended to work:

- Attack blocked by Moat, Lighthouse, Champion
- Militia and similar discard attacks when others have already discarded
- Draw card when you've already drawn your deck
- Moneylender with no Copper, Throne Room with no action, etc. (?)

Some less clear cases:

- Torturer when Curses are empty (opponents still made a choice)
- Spy when you don't have them discard, or the Spy after that (they still reveal the top card)
- Optional effects that you can decline, like King's Court or Spice Merchant (it's your choice to decline)
- Cards whose effects are only partially prevented (e.g. Shanty Town)

Even without the rules confusion, I think it's too niche and won't make a difference in most games.

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Too specific, which ultimately makes it too random for my taste.  It gives you a bonus for exactly drawing to the end of your deck without triggering a reshuffle, but players just don't usually have that much control.  Alternatively, you could draw your whole deck and then gain/discard something, but that won't be a common case.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Not a strategy I want to see rewarded, at least not so blatantly.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Errant apostrophe!  How does this work with buying Possession?

I think the idea is neat, but would like to see it restricted to non-Victory cards just to prevent the free bonus 3VP when buying the last Province.

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.

Simplicity is nice and all, but this is still kind of... boring?

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

Simple, but with an interesting decision to make.  I like this a lot more than Golden Isles for its elegance, and I think having it grant +1 Action is better than +$1 as it sets itself apart from coin tokens.

Let me suggest a variant though:

Any time during your Action phase, you may return 5VP for +1 Action.
Setup: Each player takes 5VP.


This removes the small tracking issue and also adds a small but important wrinkle with +VP cards.

If this wins, I hope that playtesting is done to find the VP value that creates the most tension.  5VP might be big enough that it's usually a no-brainer to just keep it.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.

Instead of needing that clarification, why not just say "return 1VP"?

So this rewards you for building a big sloggy deck that reshuffles as little as possible.  That sounds like it could be interesting.
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +412
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #70 on: July 29, 2016, 08:20:43 am »
0

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Do you have to trash the Duchy 'pon the left hand side?
Logged

faust

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2289
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3215
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #71 on: July 29, 2016, 09:03:55 am »
0

Some thoughts:

- Archeologist: I don't like that it encourages BM that strongly. Also, Ruins shouldn't be there I think? Minor complaint is that it uses "Kingdom piles", which Donald X. avoided.

- Burial Grounds/Mounds: I like the latter better; the former just encourages trashing, which you want to be doing anyway. I guess Burial Grounds might open up a way to mess with your opponent's deck by trashing one of their key cards. But I'm not sure if that is fun interaction; it encourages mirror play. Burial Mounds on the other hand changes the way you play the game, which is what you want out of a Landmark.

- Cenotaph: Similar to Burial Mounds, but it does some weird other thing instead of trashing. Not sure how much I like that; it just gives every game easy pseudo-trashing. 1 VP per differently named card seems insignificant. Museum already gives 2 VP.

- Citadel: Interesting, but usually in a non-mirror both players will get the benefit and in a mirror neither. I guess it's more interesting with 3+ players.

- Deep Mine: Not sure what the VP are doing on the Province pile, but I guess they have to be somewhere. It seems not very elegant though. Looks like a fancy Baths, which is fine, but I think I'd like something more original.

- Golden Isles: That is... strange. Like, lots of Baker coins. Getting VP for not having VP tokens seems counterintuitive, but I guess there's no issue with it. I imagine that it's a huge game accelerator, and I'm not sure I like that.

- Middle Class: How is the Middle Class a Landmark? Oh well. It looks similar to an Obelisk that only counts $3 cards. I think Obelisk is a better implementation of this idea.

- New World: This is interesting. And, I imagine, really hard to figure out. I like it.

- Ossuary: I think there's a wording issue, as noone benefits if the card in the trash is worth +1VP. I think it will most often turn Coppers into small Harems? That could be interesting enough.

- Plains: On first glance, I think that this often favors the player who is already ahead. That's problematic.

- Rally: The concept is somewhat interesting, but I'm not sure how you'd get around fast play to make your opponents forget to take the VP. That doesn't seem fun. On the other hand, you also don't want to remind them. I don't like that aspect.

- Sacrificial Cenote: This just screams for lenghty explanations. So each time I play a Minion for +2$, I get VP? Does it mean "do nothing to all other players" or just one? What does "resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect" even mean? If I play a Smithy with only 2 cards in my deck, do I get the VP?

- Senate: A strange condition, and almost always, the first 2n VP simply get taken after turn 2. Seems luck-based.

- Statue: So it encourages money strategies? I would make it 6 treasures in order to not give too big a boost to 5/2 openings. It's kind of iffy with Counterfeit and Spoils, maybe it's possible to instead count Treasures in play?

- Stockpile: Works better as an Event I think. "Cost $5,D5. You may overpay debt for this. Gain a card costing up to $5 plus $1 per 2D you overpaid. +3VP."

- Swamp: Is to Silk Road what Museum is to Fairgrounds. Kinda interesting, but not super exciting.

- Symposium: There should probably be a token to keep track of this. Or maybe just give the option to spend 5 VP for 1 action, and give you 5 VP to strat with?

- Turtle Sanctuary: Weird. It enourages very simply strategies, but I don't think it's impactful enough to make a difference against a deck-drawing engine.
Logged
Since the number of points is within a constant factor of the number of city quarters, in the long run we can get (4 - ε) ↑↑ n points in n turns for any ε > 0.

ThetaSigma12

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1632
  • Shuffle iT Username: ThetaSigma12
  • Respect: +1706
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #72 on: July 29, 2016, 10:29:08 am »
0

So statue benefits 5/2, but doesn't basilica and baths as well?
Logged
If you have a fan card you want to be created, just post about it here! I'd love to take a look at it.

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #73 on: July 29, 2016, 10:30:36 am »
0

I like to hear other people's impressions.  Here are a couple points where I'm disagreeing:
Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.
Another big money one... Which also rewards $5/$2 openings, something i don't really like. It's okay-ish, but not too interesting.
I think an engine with lots of draw will more consistently be able to play 5 treasures.  So either an engine with treasure as payload, or big money with draw.  Although, those VP might go fairly quickly, and BM+Smithy might be the fastest way to pick them up early on.

- Burial Grounds/Mounds: I like the latter better; the former just encourages trashing, which you want to be doing anyway. I guess Burial Grounds might open up a way to mess with your opponent's deck by trashing one of their key cards. But I'm not sure if that is fun interaction; it encourages mirror play. Burial Mounds on the other hand changes the way you play the game, which is what you want out of a Landmark.
I dispute that one of these landmarks encourages mirror play, while the other does not.  So imagine a basic situation, Alice has a Baron, but Bob does not, and there's a Baron in the trash.  Under Burial Grounds, Alice wants a mirror (by trashing all Barons), and Bob does not.  Under Burial Mounds, Bob wants a mirror (by gaining a Baron), and Alice does not.  Either way, mirror play benefits only some of the players.
Logged

tristan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1138
  • Respect: +192
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #74 on: July 29, 2016, 03:59:46 pm »
0

Not sure about Archeologist's Ruins set collection thingy, the VP seem too low. Perhaps with quadratic (1/4/9/16/...) instead of sum N scoring this would be better.

Burial Grounds provides some nice interaction as the opponent can trash a single copy card from his deck in order to hurt you.

Cenotaph
reminds me of Chapel from San Juan and even more of Valley of the Kings, a deckbuilder with this very perma-trash-for-VP function. Not sure that it works well in Dominion.

I like Citadel but not the post-game book-keeping it implies.

Deep Mine
is bad; virtually all it does is to incentivize BM.

I don't like Golden Isles. Without any VP token providing cards this plays far too automatically.

There are better ways than New World to incentivize three pile endings.

Ossuary is simple and good.

Not sure about Plains. All it seems to do is to make alt-VP bad.

I like Stockpile. Seems a but like Distant Lands, you get something similar to Duchy that doesn't stay in your deck for a similar price.

Swamp is an idea probably everybody had. I think it is fine to make cheaper Victory cards more interesting but I also think that it is too bland.

Symposium is basically just an Action token which you can "cash in" at the end of the game for 5VP. Seems like a lot but then again there could be crucial junctions at the game which might make you wanna spend it. Could lead to an agonizing decision, could feel totally flat. Hard to say.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 04:01:34 pm by tristan »
Logged

Destry

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
  • Respect: +75
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #75 on: July 29, 2016, 04:51:00 pm »
+2

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

This doesn't need the setup rule; cards get trashed in most games.

Just want to point that without the setup, in a game without trashing, all cards are tied for most common card in the trash, and therefore, all cards are +1 VP. The largest deck would get a pretty big bonus.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #76 on: July 29, 2016, 05:10:27 pm »
0

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

This doesn't need the setup rule; cards get trashed in most games.

Just want to point that without the setup, in a game without trashing, all cards are tied for most common card in the trash, and therefore, all cards are +1 VP. The largest deck would get a pretty big bonus.

It's equally valid (and I'd say more common) to say that there must be at least 1 copy in the trash for it to count.  If there's nothing trashed, then thre is nothing in the trash to be worth +1VP.
Logged

Destry

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
  • Respect: +75
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #77 on: July 29, 2016, 05:37:26 pm »
0

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

This doesn't need the setup rule; cards get trashed in most games.

Just want to point that without the setup, in a game without trashing, all cards are tied for most common card in the trash, and therefore, all cards are +1 VP. The largest deck would get a pretty big bonus.

It's equally valid (and I'd say more common) to say that there must be at least 1 copy in the trash for it to count.  If there's nothing trashed, then thre is nothing in the trash to be worth +1VP.

Good point, especially since you could use, say Gravedigger, to retrieve the lone Duchy from the trash and leave it empty. I do prefer it with the setup and have a default bonus card.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 05:38:34 pm by Destry »
Logged

Destry

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
  • Respect: +75
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #78 on: July 29, 2016, 05:43:31 pm »
0

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if the trash is not empty, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Trying a quick fix.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 05:45:25 pm by Destry »
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark
« Reply #79 on: July 30, 2016, 07:24:59 am »
+1

Quote
Archaeologist
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1/3/6/10/15 VP if you have 1/2/3/4/5 copies of a particular Ruins.

Setup: Put a Ruins face-up sideways on each Kingdom pile. When a player gains the first card from a Kingdom pile, they also gain the Ruins on top of it.

Even not taken into account the usage of ruins, I am not a huge fan of the first mover advantage on this.


Quote
Burial Grounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, -3 VP for each differently named card in your deck which has a copy in the trash.

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Well... 2 people really need to come forward and explain this coincidence, haha. Either way, not a huge fan of either concept. I tried thinking about doing anything with the trash, but nothing really stuck out. This particular examples don't really show me otherwise. The first one: when you can trash copper, you'll trash all the copper. The second one: even if you can trash copper, it's not that difficult to keep one copper. Either way, not a huge fan. I am trying to imagine fun game interactions, but I am just not seeing it.

I did like Conman's point on Grounds: " I suppose it's an incentive to throw a few engine pieces in the trash in the hopes of catching your opponent out." Maybe Bural Grounds should be restricted to action cards, so you can only use it strategically in that sense, which is awesome. On the other hand, maybe that just incentivizes BM, which is bad.

Quote
Cenotaph
Types: Landmark
During Clean-up, you may place one card you discard from play or your hand face down underneath this.

When scoring, 1 VP per differently named card underneath this that you have a copy of.

Clarification: You may place one card underneath Cenotaph every turn.

This is slightly better, I think, but there should be some kind of penalty, I think, otherwise it's just a free trasher, even without the vp gaining.

Quote
Citadel
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per card in your deck which no other player has a copy of.

A bit lackluser. I think I'll probably like it more if it was slightly more VP.

Quote
Deep Mine
Types: Landmark
Whenever a player plays their second action in a single turn, move 1 VP from the Province pile to here.
Whenever a player ends their turn without having played any action cards, take the VP from here.

Setup: Put 8 VP on the Province pile, plus 2 VP per player.

This one I do like, although it probably, again, incentivizes playing BM versus a non-bm player, which is bad.

Quote
Golden Isles
Types: Landmark
During each player's buy phase, they may return 1 VP token for +$1. This may only be done once per turn.
When scoring, 4 VP if you have no VP tokens, and 2 VP if you have fewer than 2 VP tokens.

Setup:  Each player receives 13 VP tokens at start of game.

Using VP for $ is interesting. I am just not sure if it works.

Quote
Middle Class
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per non-Treasure card costing exactly $3 in your deck.

Too much like an outtake and a little bit uninspiring.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

I usually hate 3 pile endings, but this is an hilarious way of actually forcing it. I do think I like it, because it's so cruel. Playing with this landmark in a game where 3 pile endings would be weird is hilarious.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Cute set up. But again: making coppers worth something is meh. I guess it's only cool in non-estate, non-copper trashing games, imo. Everything else it just feels meh.

Quote
Plains
Types: Landmark
Whenever you gain a Victory card, move 2 VP from its pile to this. When you gain a Province, take the VP from this.

Setup: Put 4 VP on each non-Gathering, non-Province Victory card Supply pile per player.

A bit uninspiring. To me, the idea of VP is to get VP in a different way, not more VP when you buy V cards.

Quote
Rally
Types: Landmark
Once during an opponents turn, when all of your opponent's cards are either in play or in their hand, take 1 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Cute. Not wow, but ok. Less accounting than philosopher's stone, so that's cool.

Quote
Sacrificial Cenote
Types: Landmark
Whenever you resolve an attack which ends up doing nothing to other players, or otherwise resolve a card that is prevented from having its printed effect, +1 VP.

Sounds like it'll need a large faq, but I guess it's not strictly impossible to define what it means, right. So I am going to give it the benefit of the doubt.

Quote
Senate
Types: Landmark
At the start of your Buy phase, if you have no cards in your deck and at least one card in your discard pile, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

A bit bland, but it works on an unusual thing, so that's good.

Quote
Statue
Types: Landmark
At the end of your turn, if you played 5 or more treasures that turn, take 2 VP from here.

Setup: Put 6 VP here per player.

Needs less BM.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Could have been an event (as some have mentioned), and does give the last province buy +3 free VP. But besides that, I think it'll create interesting discussions. I don't think it'll get out of hand too much: If you use this and you want to buy use this a second time, well, that's at least $15 you'd need, for 6 VP. Paying $10 for a $5 card and a duchy seems reasonable enough, but do you really want the 3VP now or build some more to get more stuff later?

Quote
Swamp
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 1 VP per Victory card you have.

Very bland, but I do think it works.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

I like where this is going, but I don't think it's there yet.

Quote
Turtle Sanctuary
Types: Landmark
When you reshuffle, -1 VP.
At the end of your turn, if you did not reshuffle this turn, +1 VP

Clarification: -1 VP means you return one of your VP tokens to the supply. If you do not have any VP tokens, do nothing.

Slogdecks like it. That's an interesting thing.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #80 on: August 01, 2016, 12:36:19 am »
0

One of these entries is mine, and it's one that's getting a fair amount of mixed response (which I suspected would happen). I'm going to guess that I'll just miss out on the run-off, and failing that I don't think I have a great chance of winning, but I will definitely squirrel my idea away to tweak some of the details on because I do like the idea, as do a few other people.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4795
  • Respect: +5119
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #81 on: August 01, 2016, 04:13:38 pm »
0

My entry is pretty much recognized as what it is and gets what it deserves. Somebody has to do the things that have to be done. Am i giving away too much? Either way, with all the interesting submissions, i'm still curious to the voting.

Also, was there a contest before where the pre-finals winner was the finals winner? I feel most of the past contests had the order shaken up quite a bit. I wonder why that is.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #82 on: August 01, 2016, 05:06:35 pm »
+2

Probably the pre-finals winner is one that a lot of people think are OK, but nobody really loves a lot? I vote for like 6 entries in the poll, but when submitting scores I tend to give 10 to two entries and 0 to the rest (sometimes a 5 in there, but usually not). The score distribution isn't public so it's hard to say what's going on there.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #83 on: August 01, 2016, 05:12:40 pm »
+1

Probably the pre-finals winner is one that a lot of people think are OK, but nobody really loves a lot? I vote for like 6 entries in the poll, but when submitting scores I tend to give 10 to two entries and 0 to the rest (sometimes a 5 in there, but usually not). The score distribution isn't public so it's hard to say what's going on there.

I usually rank them something like: 0/2/4/6/8/10. Sometimes a bit more/a bit less.
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 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #84 on: August 02, 2016, 11:11:58 am »
+1

Also, was there a contest before where the pre-finals winner was the finals winner? I feel most of the past contests had the order shaken up quite a bit. I wonder why that is.

Odyssey (Event 1) and Collector (Prosperity) both won as the preliminary leader. The preliminary leaders have won twice, finished second twice (by 3 and 4 points respectively, so easily could have won with one more voter), finished third twice... and then in the Seaside contest the tied leaders finished 4th and 5th in the range voting, but the other finalists were only a vote behind in the preliminaries there. Circus is the only eventual winner to have been more than two votes back of the leader in the preliminaries.

The preliminary winners have done a little better on average than the rest; still, some of the shake up is likely due to low turnout (Prosperity had the highest so far thanks to the reminder message, but still only 14 voters, vs. 30 in the preliminary).

I'll post some more stats on the range voting at some point, but Royal Guard (in the Guilds runoff) has the highest variance so far, with three 10s, a 5, and five 0s. Base winner Florist is next, with five 10s, a 4, a 2, and three 0s.
« Last Edit: August 02, 2016, 11:20:07 am by mith »
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #85 on: August 07, 2016, 10:42:46 am »
+1


Ossuary (13)
Quote
    Ossuary
    Types: Landmark
    When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)
    Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Burial Mounds (11)
Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Stockpile (11)
Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

New World (9)
Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

Symposium (8 )
Quote
    Symposium
    Types: Landmark
    Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
    At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

Cenotaph (7)
Swamp (7)
Turtle Sanctuary (6)
Burial Grounds (6)
Citadel (5)
Statue (5)
Deep Mine (4)
Archeologist (3)
Golden Isles (3)
Plains (3)
Senate (3)
Middle Class (2)
Rally (1)
Sacrificial Cenote (0)


Poor Sacrificial Cenote!
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #86 on: August 07, 2016, 10:46:22 am »
0

So what do we all think of the top 5?

I am a bit uncertain on Ossuary, but I guess it's cool that in a non-trashing game, 7 dutchies are worth 4 VP each. In trashing games, I am not sure if I like it there. Coppers suddenly worth 1 vp each?

Burial Mounds; I am not sure that will have such a huge effect, right? I mean, all players will probably have very similar cards in their deck.

Stockpile is cool, but I am not sure: wouldn't the best strategy to always take the 3 vp?

New World is brutal if there is no 3 pile ending, which is cool, imo.

I like symposium the least. I would like it more if it was something like: 'set up: everyone starts with 12 vp. Give up 2 vp for +1 action during your action phase' or whatever. Like it is, it's a little too little decisionmaking/strategy, imo.
Logged

faust

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2289
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3215
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #87 on: August 07, 2016, 11:33:59 am »
0

I'm overall pleased with the finalists.

I like the idea of Ossuary, but I think it does the same thing too often:
- no trashing: Duchies are now worth 4VP. Kinda boring.
- trashing: Coppers are worth 1 VP OR Curses are now Confusions OR Estates are now worth 2VP.
It would be nice if it would result in kingdom cards being worth something more often, but I don't really see that... maybe with Rats? Or in some weird Procession game? But generally, if a kingdom card is the most common in the trash, then there aren't many copies of it around to be worth something... I feel like there's something that can be done similar to Ossuary that would work, but as it is I think it's not quite there yet.

Burial Mounds... well, it will be interesting in non-mirrors. I agree with Adrian that it's somewhat boring in mirrors, though it still does some cute things there.

I like Stockpile's concept, but I really think it should rather be an Event. It's much more rule-changing that the printed Landmarks, and it can easily be made to work as an Event.

New World looks appealing to me, but it's a kind of idea that needs thorough playtesting. My fear is that it may turn BM boards into horrific slogs. I can imagine that it could be really cool on lots of boards though.

I would like Symposium to be a little different too, like being able to transform VP chips into actions in general. It's also a bit too much rule chang-y to fit in with official Landmarks.
Logged
Since the number of points is within a constant factor of the number of city quarters, in the long run we can get (4 - ε) ↑↑ n points in n turns for any ε > 0.

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 648
  • Respect: +987
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #88 on: August 07, 2016, 11:57:34 am »
0

Several of the ones I voted for were disqualified.  Including my own.  Too bad.  Further comments on the finalists:

Ossuary - My main problem with this is that the most trashed card isn't a really competitive slot most of the time.  It's nearly always copper.  1 VP for copper is not very exciting, and I prefer the one-time 15 VP swing from Fountain.  That said, maybe there are a few exciting games where copper trashing is bad, and Estates are competing with Hermits for most trashed card.  Even then, 1 VP for Hermits vs 1 VP for Estates seems like a small impact.

Burial Mounds - As AdrianHealey pointed out, all players will probably have similar cards in their deck.  If that is the case, what can one do to get the VP?  You could lock your opponent out of getting certain cards.  You could choose a unique card, buy two, and trash one (and your opponent's response is to gain one for themselves).  Maybe there are a few other shenanigans.  It seems difficult to take advantage of though.

Stockpile - As I said before, this seems really powerful.  There's little need for greening at all, just build exponentially.  The main thing that worries me is that this will have a negative impact on the game.  I like the slow-down in the late game.  Would Stockpile simply remove that step?

New World - I liked this card a lot, because I wasn't sure what to do with it.  After more thought, I think you should first go for a few provinces--if no one went for provinces, they'd each be worth 6VP.  However, if one player takes 5 or 6 provinces, then the other player can threaten to buy out the rest, along with a few duchies, and win.  So maybe you want ~3 provinces, and then empty duchies.  It seems like it would lead to many interesting and novel strategy considerations, and that's just in a standard game.  What about 3-player games, colony games?

Symposium - Previously, I thought you would just never use the action.  I suppose in the second shuffle, if your terminals collide you might try it.  Or is it more of a late game thing, when your engine duds because you drew hunting grounds without a village?  What's the strategic impact here?  Do I open double-terminal just for this?  Do I go for a slightly less reliable and more powerful engine?  I think probably not.
(Also I don't think this counts as a pure landmark.)
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #89 on: August 07, 2016, 12:27:26 pm »
+1

Stockpile will see 'exponentially' building in games with very good engine pieces, but even there: you still want some greening, right? Paying 8 for 6VP (and a dead card) at some point will still be better than paying 5+<5> for 'only' 3 VP. It'll just be later than 'usual'. So this will definitely see later greening, but it's not like you won't see something equivalent to 'Dutchy dancing' in these games too, I think.
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 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #90 on: August 08, 2016, 05:47:20 pm »
0

Results:

Ossuary - 13
Burial Mounds - 11
Stockpile - 11
New World - 9
Symposium - 8

Cenotaph - 7
Swamp - 7
Burial Grounds - 6
Turtle Sanctuary - 6
Citadel - 5
Statue - 5
Deep Mine - 4
Archaeologist - 3
Golden Isles - 3
Plains - 3
Senate - 3
Middle Class - 2
Rally - 1
Sacrificial Cenote - 0
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 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #91 on: August 08, 2016, 05:47:49 pm »
0

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

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

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1177
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +903
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #92 on: August 08, 2016, 07:17:22 pm »
+1

I'm ashamed of my submission now. I said to myself "what can I come up with right now for the landmark contest," and I put almost no thought into it. And I ended up not voting for it.

Also, I was considering voting for swamp, but decided not to. If I had, it would be a finalist. My apologies to its designer...

PS: Why did Adrian know the voting results before Mith posted them?
EDIT: ...because the poll results are public, duh.

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1317
  • Respect: +1546
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #93 on: August 08, 2016, 07:41:57 pm »
0

Ha. I called it, at least regarding my own entry. Oh well, thank you to the 6 other people who voted for Cenotaph, and good luck to the finalists!
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4795
  • Respect: +5119
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #94 on: August 08, 2016, 09:36:11 pm »
+1

I'm ashamed of my submission now. I said to myself "what can I come up with right now for the landmark contest," and I put almost no thought into it. And I ended up not voting for it.

Also, I was considering voting for swamp, but decided not to. If I had, it would be a finalist. My apologies to its designer...

PS: Why did Adrian know the voting results before Mith posted them?
EDIT: ...because the poll results are public, duh.

I made up Swamp, but i also just did it because i felt: "This is so obvious, it has to be done. If nobody else does this, i will." Also, i didn't want to think too much about it, didn't have that much time back then.

I still feel Swamp is fine and will have a rather big influence on games. I'm not fully convinced that influence will always make games more fun (as it might make them sloggier), but i am under the impression that it's a fine design. Certainly better than a blank. Also, yes, it obviously looks incredibly bland, but i think that how interesting something plays isn't related to how interesting the words on it sound.

Also, i again didn't vote. Could have helped myself here. I just always feel it would be weird to vote for my own stuff, so i stay away.

Gubump

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 333
  • Respect: +189
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #95 on: August 08, 2016, 10:59:28 pm »
0

Quote
Burial Mounds
Types: Landmark
When scoring, 3 VP per differently named card in the trash that you have a copy of.

I like this one a lot. I hope this one wins.

Quote
New World
Types: Landmark
When scoring, if there are 2 or fewer empty Supply piles, -4 VP for each Victory card costing $6 or more in your deck.

This one is okay, I guess.

Quote
Ossuary
Types: Landmark
When scoring, the most common card in the trash is worth +1 VP. (If it's a tie, all tied cards are.)

Setup: Trash a Duchy.

I also like this one, but not as much as Burial Mounds. I also learned a new word because of this.

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Mith, are we allowed to change our ratings? After a second glance, I just realized that this doesn't allow infinite VP accumulation like I thought it did.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

I don't like this one for two reasons:
1) No way to track whether you've used the Action or not.
2) It's my belief that in about 99.9999% of games, nobody will ever use that Action because it's that unlikely that +1 Action means the difference between a Province and an Estate or between a Colony and a Duchy, which means that everbody gets +5 VP, which, since it benefits everybody equally, is as good as not being there at all.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his/her Dominion Card Image Generator.

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9145
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #96 on: August 09, 2016, 02:08:53 am »
+2

Quote
Stockpile
Types: Landmark
When you buy a card costing at least $5, you may take it's price in debt. If you do, +3 VP.

Mith, are we allowed to change our ratings? After a second glance, I just realized that this doesn't allow infinite VP accumulation like I thought it did.

Quote
Symposium
Types: Landmark
Once per game, at any time during the Action phase, +1 Action.
At the end of the game, if you did not use that Action, +5 VP.

I don't like this one for two reasons:
1) No way to track whether you've used the Action or not.
2) It's my belief that in about 99.9999% of games, nobody will ever use that Action because it's that unlikely that +1 Action means the difference between a Province and an Estate or between a Colony and a Duchy, which means that everbody gets +5 VP, which, since it benefits everybody equally, is as good as not being there at all.

Interesting, Stockpile can provide unbounded VP tokens, though it's unlikely.  Buy card that costs $5+, take debt and VP.  Reveal Trader to not gain the $5 card.

For Symposium, I think (1) it's pretty easy to remember this one decision and (2) a single +1 action could make such a difference.  But even if it doesn't, I think the idea itself is interesting and the numbers could be tweaked to make the decision tougher, with some playtesting to determine what the appropriate number would be.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #97 on: August 09, 2016, 03:48:02 am »
0

Generating infinite vp in stockpile is possible, but generating 10$ for 3vp + trader in hand seems like a difficult enough set up to consider it not that huge of a problem. Monument chains seem easier for the infinite vp set up.

Some more thought later. I guess I like 3/5 finalists, but would tweak each of them a little. I guess I'll give most points to the ones that needs tweaking the least in my mind or something.
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 8: Landmark (Voting!)
« Reply #98 on: August 09, 2016, 11:31:39 am »
0

Mith, are we allowed to change our ratings?

You are absolutely allowed to change your ratings, as often as you like* until about five minutes before I post the results.

*Within reason; I reserve the right to change your ratings to random numbers if you send me a thousand edits.
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 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #99 on: August 17, 2016, 03:05:57 pm »
0

Voting here will close Friday; I'll try to get reminders out before then so we get more votes. Next contest will also be up then.
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 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #100 on: August 23, 2016, 05:45:31 pm »
+1

Results:

Ossuary (spiralstaircase) - 98
Stockpile (AdrianHealey) - 86.5
New World (Fragasnap) - 75
Burial Mounds (faust) - 57.5
Symposium (Seprix) - 42

Congrats to spiralstaircase! High scores this round thanks to 15 voters.
Logged

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Results!)
« Reply #101 on: August 23, 2016, 05:53:35 pm »
+1

So close :(
Logged

spiralstaircase

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +412
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Finalists!)
« Reply #102 on: August 25, 2016, 04:12:43 pm »
+2

Results:
Ossuary (spiralstaircase) - 98

Woohoo!
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1177
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +903
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Results!)
« Reply #103 on: August 25, 2016, 07:19:42 pm »
0

So close
Stockpile was my favorite of them.

AdrianHealey

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2244
  • Respect: +770
    • View Profile
Re: 2016 Treasure Chest Design Contest - Part 8: Landmark (Results!)
« Reply #104 on: August 25, 2016, 07:21:54 pm »
0

Seriously considering sending it an as an event, but I personally like it more as a landmark.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All]
 

Page created in 0.344 seconds with 21 queries.