Print

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

[AJD]

Picking this up from a discussion in an unrelated thread, here's my idea for an after-the-fact village:

Hidden Village
$4: Action-Reaction
+1 card
+1 action
----------
During your Action phase, if you have 0 actions remaining, you may reveal this from your hand and play it.

(Thanks to Robz888 for thinking of the name "Hidden Village".)

The idea is that playing a terminal draw action and then revealing Hidden Village has the same effect as playing Village and then your Smithy (or whatever), but Hidden Village is easier to use because you're more likely to have it in your hand when you need it. Pst suggests a variety of other minor ways it may be more useful than regular Village, which seems to justify the $4 price point; but it's not strictly better, so a $3 price could be justifiable too.

[rinkworks]

I've played a lot of games with this:

Ruins
$3 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
--
You may play this during your Action phase even if you have no actions remaining.

Using your reasoning, I thought this was a $4 card too, but it's not.  The disadvantage from Village is that if your Smithy isn't in your initial hand but in the card you draw after playing it -- then it's worse than having a Village.  Small difference, but it's just so far from a $4-level card that it needs to be $3.

But at $3, it's a lot of fun.

[AJD]

Yeah, I totally buy that rationale for $3; the card does seem not-quite-as-good-as Fishing Village, for instance.

I think it kind of has to be a Reaction, though, doesn't it?

[rinkworks]

I think it kind of has to be a Reaction, though, doesn't it?

I'm not so sure.  The way I have it is pretty clear and unambiguous, but I do like the elegance of how your version integrates better into the standard Dominion rules.

[AJD]

I kind of feel like you could make a case that "You may play this during your Action phase even if you have no actions remaining" would still leave you with 0 actions afterward—playing it would take you down to –1 actions, and then the +1 Action brings you back up to 0, since you're still opting to play it as an action yourself. Whereas having a card get played as a result of a Reaction ability is more like having it get played as a result of Golem or Throne Room and thus not reduce the Action count. That's my intuition, anyway, though I'm not sure how far I'd be willing to defend it.

[brokoli]

Excellent idea, I love it.

[Kuraku256]

How about:

+1 Card
+1 Action
__________
Hidden Village does not cost an action to play. (You may play it with no actions remaining.)"

This version would need to cost $4 though since its strictly better than Village.

[Robz888]

I love the idea behind this card. Happy to have contributed the name

[GendoIkari]

I think it kind of has to be a Reaction, though, doesn't it?

I'm not so sure.  The way I have it is pretty clear and unambiguous, but I do like the elegance of how your version integrates better into the standard Dominion rules.

I think AJD is right; Dominion doesn't seem to like cards that ever contradict a rule (People have proposed cards like "you can only play one of these per turn" and then someone always responds with "but what if Golem reveals 2 of them?") Dominion rules clearly state that you cannot play an action if you have no Actions remaining in your pool, so with this card out you would have to figure out if you should break the rule on the card or the rule in the rulebook. Making it a reaction completely avoids this.

[Zem]

I really like this concept.

I though I could simplify it by dropping the action part entirely:

Hidden Village
- $3 - Reaction
After playing an action, you may discard this from your your hand.
If you do: +1 card, +1 action.

I thought this would be better since you do not have to explicitely mention concepts like "action phase" or "actions remaining" on the card, and there is only one way to play it instead of two similar ones
There is of course one big problem: since you discard it, you could then draw it again. If you have drawn your whole deck, it becomes an infinite +action machine.
Also, it becomes harder to track gamestate. I guess that is what we have an in-play area for.

so how about this:

Hidden Village
- $3 - Reaction
After playing an action, you may put this into play from your your hand.
If you do: +1 card, +1 action.

So now you have a non-action non-treasure in play, which is kind of weird.  You could also "set it aside", but then you'd have to explicitely mention when it is cleaned up.
In any case it is useless when drawn without an action, so $3 should be plenty


But how about this variation:

Lost City - $5 - treasure - reaction ($2) After playing an action, you may put this into play face-down from your hand. If you do: +1 action, +1 card

This is supposed to represent Machu Picchu, the fabled "Lost City of Incas".
You can either plunder Machu Picchu for its gold, or leave it hidden and reap the village bonus.

It is a silver+ so it has to cost at least $5, which seems like a good price point for it. A Lost City / Smithy Engine sounds like it could be fun.

[rinkworks]

How about:

+1 Card
+1 Action
__________
Hidden Village does not cost an action to play. (You may play it with no actions remaining.)"

This version would need to cost $4 though since its strictly better than Village.

It's really not, though.  There are at least two ways in which it is inferior:

1. (Hidden) Village, Copper, Copper, Copper, Copper.  Play (H)V, draw a Smithy.  Play Smithy, draw three cards.  If your Village was a vanilla Village, you'd have an extra action with which to play something your Smithy drew.  If your Village was a Hidden Village, you are out of actions and can't play anything.

2. More of a niche case, but say you have plenty of actions from other Villages before you ever draw Hidden Village into your hand, and you don't have enough terminals to get back down to 0 actions remaining.  In this case, Hidden Village is just a cantrip, while a vanilla Village will still increase your actions remaining.  Now, often this won't matter, since a turn that plays out like this is not likely to need the extra action.  But there are two cases when it does matter:  (A) if you've got the Diadem; (B) if you draw, with that (Hidden) Village a drawing terminal, which draws enough other actions that you WILL eventually get back down to 0 actions remaining.

On average, yes, I'd rather have a Hidden Village than a regular Village.  But it's still solidly a $3 card, and the fact that it isn't strictly superior to Village allows it to be priced that way.

[AJD]

How about:

+1 Card
+1 Action
__________
Hidden Village does not cost an action to play. (You may play it with no actions remaining.)"

This version would need to cost $4 though since its strictly better than Village.

It's really not, though.  There are at least two ways in which it is inferior:

1. (Hidden) Village, Copper, Copper, Copper, Copper.  Play (H)V, draw a Smithy.  Play Smithy, draw three cards.  If your Village was a vanilla Village, you'd have an extra action with which to play something your Smithy drew.  If your Village was a Hidden Village, you are out of actions and can't play anything.

I think Kuraku256's version doesn't have that issue, since it's got that "does not cost an action to play" stipulation. That said, I think the versions which don't have that stipulation, and therefore do collapse in the draw-into-Smithy scenario, are more interesting.

[GendoIkari]

How about:

+1 Card
+1 Action
__________
Hidden Village does not cost an action to play. (You may play it with no actions remaining.)"

This version would need to cost $4 though since its strictly better than Village.

It's really not, though.  There are at least two ways in which it is inferior:

1. (Hidden) Village, Copper, Copper, Copper, Copper.  Play (H)V, draw a Smithy.  Play Smithy, draw three cards.  If your Village was a vanilla Village, you'd have an extra action with which to play something your Smithy drew.  If your Village was a Hidden Village, you are out of actions and can't play anything.

2. More of a niche case, but say you have plenty of actions from other Villages before you ever draw Hidden Village into your hand, and you don't have enough terminals to get back down to 0 actions remaining.  In this case, Hidden Village is just a cantrip, while a vanilla Village will still increase your actions remaining.  Now, often this won't matter, since a turn that plays out like this is not likely to need the extra action.  But there are two cases when it does matter:  (A) if you've got the Diadem; (B) if you draw, with that (Hidden) Village a drawing terminal, which draws enough other actions that you WILL eventually get back down to 0 actions remaining.

On average, yes, I'd rather have a Hidden Village than a regular Village.  But it's still solidly a $3 card, and the fact that it isn't strictly superior to Village allows it to be priced that way.

No, you missed the fact that it "does not cost an action to play." This means that if you had one action remaining when you played it, you have 2 actions remaining afterwards, because playing it did not decrease your count (still at 1) and resolving what it does increases your count by 1 (now at 2).

[Phillipnotphil]

How about this:
-Costs 4
Played as a reaction:
+1 card
+ 1 action
discard this card

Played as an action:
+1 card
+ 2 actions

[Asklepios]

I really like this concept.

I though I could simplify it by dropping the action part entirely:

Hidden Village
- $3 - Reaction
After playing an action, you may discard this from your your hand.
If you do: +1 card, +1 action.

I thought this would be better since you do not have to explicitely mention concepts like "action phase" or "actions remaining" on the card, and there is only one way to play it instead of two similar ones
There is of course one big problem: since you discard it, you could then draw it again. If you have drawn your whole deck, it becomes an infinite +action machine.
Also, it becomes harder to track gamestate. I guess that is what we have an in-play area for.

so how about this:

Hidden Village
- $3 - Reaction
After playing an action, you may put this into play from your your hand.
If you do: +1 card, +1 action.

So now you have a non-action non-treasure in play, which is kind of weird.  You could also "set it aside", but then you'd have to explicitely mention when it is cleaned up.
In any case it is useless when drawn without an action, so $3 should be plenty


But how about this variation:

Lost City - $5 - treasure - reaction ($2) After playing an action, you may put this into play face-down from your hand. If you do: +1 action, +1 card

This is supposed to represent Machu Picchu, the fabled "Lost City of Incas".
You can either plunder Machu Picchu for its gold, or leave it hidden and reap the village bonus.

It is a silver+ so it has to cost at least $5, which seems like a good price point for it. A Lost City / Smithy Engine sounds like it could be fun.

Playing face down? Don't like that idea, as its unclear whether other players get to see that card, and thus would require a degree of honesty from less scrupulous players (something that Dominion has been noted to trying to avoid). Plus the rules would need a lot of clarifications baout what face down means. Is a face down treasure still a treasure in play? Etc.

I see that what you're trying to say though - either use it as money or as a free +1 card/+1action. I think it needs rephrasing though.

[Zem]

How about this:
-Costs 4
Played as a reaction:
+1 card
+ 1 action
discard this card

Played as an action:
+1 card
+ 2 actions

When testing this, you will run into the same problems I mentioned earlier in this thread.

- You can play the reaction multiple times in the same turn, even infinite times
(you have your whole deck in hand. discard a hidden village, draw nothing. discard another village, draw the first village. repeat)

- If playing with real cards, what if at some point there is a disagreement over how many actions are left, or someone loses count? you'd need to introduce tokens or write the turn down to keep track.

Lost City
- $5 - treasure - reaction

($2)
After playing an action,
you may put this into play face-down
from your hand.
If you do: +1 action, +1 card

This is supposed to represent Machu Picchu, the fabled "Lost City of Incas".
You can either plunder Machu Picchu for its gold, or leave it hidden and reap the village bonus.

It is a silver+ so it has to cost at least $5, which seems like a good price point for it. A Lost City / Smithy Engine sounds like it could be fun.

Playing face down? Don't like that idea, as its unclear whether other players get to see that card, and thus would require a degree of honesty from less scrupulous players (something that Dominion has been noted to trying to avoid). Plus the rules would need a lot of clarifications baout what face down means. Is a face down treasure still a treasure in play? Etc.

I see that what you're trying to say though - either use it as money or as a free +1 card/+1action. I think it needs rephrasing though.

My intention was that the player reveals it, then puts it face down; and that a face down card counts as nothing except as a token to track turn history.
So when someone loses track of the turn, you can reconstruct it thus: " I played this smity, drawing 3 cards, then I played this lost city face down, drawing 1 card, leaving me with 7 cards and 1 action, then this diadem, worth $3..."

I am a bit unsatisified with the face down part too. But anyting else like putting it there sideways seems more confusing. And discarding does not work. Perhaps "setting it aside" might work.
The face-down part does mesh well thematically with the hidden city aspect of Machu Picchu though.


The honesty part is easily taken care of though, by explicitely revealing it first.
That also fits better with the wording on other reactions:

Lost City
- $5 - treasure - reaction
(gives $2)
After playing an action,
you may reveal this from your hand
and put it into play face-down.

If you do: +1 action, +1 card


Here is a version without the face down part. I am not really sure I like that better though.

Lost City
- $5 - treasure - reaction
(gives $2)
After playing an action,
you may reveal this from your hand
and set it aside (this does not count as 'in play').

If you do: +1 action, +1 card.
At the end of your turn, discard it

[Jimmmmm]

What about a $5 Treasure which says something like:

$2
+1 Action
It is now your action phase.

This is most comparable to Festival, except it lacks the +buy, and can never be drawn dead.

[Zem]

What about a $5 Treasure which says something like:

$2
+1 Action
It is now your action phase.

This is most comparable to Festival, except it lacks the +buy, and can never be drawn dead.

you could play any number of treasures before returning to your action phase. Seems too powerful with watchtower, library, tactican, horse traders, quarry, etc. The whole black market cheese with a far easier setup.

[michaeljb]

Why not just use the same Reaction mechanism as Horse Traders, but instead of drawing back into hand on the next turn, just discard at the end of the current one?

Hidden Village
- $3 - Reaction
After playing an action, you may set this aside from your hand. If you do, +1 Card and +1 Action, and at the start of Clean-up, put this in your discard pile.

edit:
Perhaps it should be an Action-Reaction with just +1 Card/+1 Action for its Action effect...a handful of 5 Villages with 5 Smithies on top of the deck should make for a nice turn, a handful of Hidden Villages before the terminals ain't so great. But then, that does make it more interesting I think...

[Diving Pikachu]

This is an old post from a different thread, but I think it's relevant enough:

A pure Reaction (not labeled as also an Action) reverse-order village:

Pilgrim Camp $2
(Reaction)

If you draw a card during your action phase, you may reveal and discard this card. If you do, +1 Action.
***

It's missing the +1 card that would make it a closer mirror of Village, because such a card would be too often better than Village, as you could never draw it dead, but this wouldn't be a very exciting $4 village. Plus, we have too many of those already. I want another $2 village, as those inhabit much more unique design spaces. Obviously, this needs drawing power on the board to work at all, but even a single +1 card can trigger it.

[AHoppy]

Playing face down? Don't like that idea, as its unclear whether other players get to see that card, and thus would require a degree of honesty from less scrupulous players (something that Dominion has been noted to trying to avoid). Plus the rules would need a lot of clarifications baout what face down means. Is a face down treasure still a treasure in play? Etc.

I see that what you're trying to say though - either use it as money or as a free +1 card/+1action. I think it needs rephrasing though.

how about instead of playing face down, you play it face up, but it is no longer a treasure, more like a conspirator except backwards.  if you have no actions left, +2 treasure +1 action +1 card, this costs no actions to play