Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Holunder's cards  (Read 3692 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Holunder's cards
« on: January 26, 2018, 05:58:09 am »
+10

Hi folks, been a lurker on this and the German forum and since Nocturne came out I worked on some cards, done with herw's great template.
There are Night cards, Heirlooms, new States and new junk, cards based on offical outtakes (lame!) and cards based on ideas by other fan card designers: Gazbag's freeze mechanic, ThetaSigma12's Landforms and Asper's Edicts:



Blackmail is a new junk card that should feature a different card back to prevent cheating. Racketeer and City Guard are probably gonna be part of either a split pile or a double pile with none covered up by the other and both being in the Supply all the time.
City Guard might be too good as it could easily net a lot of Coin tokens but I expect it to mostly shine in the late part of the game and in alt-VP.





Assassin also features 20 (I don't often play 4P so 20 suffice) unique junk cards. They are supposed to be shuffled together (with the top card of the pile being visible like with Ruins) which might be too random, e.g. in a game without trashers Heretic is very nasty. In general the junk is on the weaker side, they are all cantrips and you can e.g. discard a Turncoat with a Turncoat.
Bribe is based on an outtake and perhaps it works here. The junk is not that bad such that to pass or not to pass the Bribe sometimes (hopefully!) becomes a real decision.





These are just "vanilla" states which, like Lost in the Woods, are singular and wander between player. The more interesting part of Conjuration should be that kind of bidding game. The mechanic is directly taken from Runewars.





Royal Guard is pretty straightforward and actually came before Conjuration (see above for Protected).





Glacier is a variation of Gazbag's card, taking into account Cookielord's suggestion to make this pure green which could lead to more interesting alt-VP play.





Ordinary Night cards cannot feature vanilla stuff, hence all the Night-Durations. Tokens are another way and Nightmare and Spectre are shots at that. Nightmare's attack is based on an outtake by DXV. Note that you can only be hit once during your turns which might partially compensate for the non-terminality of the attack. It could of course still be too strong.
Action tokens should function like Coin of the Realm, i.e. you spend them after having played an Action card to get +1 Action.





There are 3 cases with Spectre:
no trashers - this only hexes.
trashers but no other junkers - this is a Copper/Estate junker
trashers and other junkers - universal junker
In my opinion only the last case is potentially problematic but I don't expect the trashing/junking ping-pong that could arise to be worse than multiplayer Ambassador (unlike with Ambassador you gotta play 2 cards).
But of course it has to be tested, increasing the size of the junk pool is a dubious idea.





Like Rats and Magpies those Owls procreate but not that easily. I am not quite happy with the other parts of the card though. It probably has to cost 5 as you can easily make them behave like Bakers with, most likely, 2VPs stacked on top of it. Key is there to make Owl decent in the opening. Putting Victory cards into your hand probably doesn't have many interactions, only Monastery and City Guard comes to mind, so that part could be deleted.





Evocation is another outtake.





Icelands is based on Gazbag's freeze mechanic and ThetaSigma12's Landmarks and might be too boring: you just automatically do it whenever you green and have Coins left. When you thaw the cards the Ice tokens are supposed to return to the Supply, not to Icelands; this rule should be on the card but I felt it was too wordy.





More overpaying with Peace. The Edict mechanic is an invention of Asper and I tried to set the ratio such that there are no 'strictly better' cases but Tunnel-Duchy is the exception.


UPDATE:
Chappy7 pointed out that Spectre is bad if good stuff lands in the trash so I changed Spectre to only junk cards from the trash that cost up to 2.
Owl got nerfed (really?) a different Victory condition (from DXV's Secret History). It is in general a difficult condition to meet but Owl can be used as economy.





Azure Cove
is new and might be too similar to Avanto. Avanto is only non-terminal if you draw into Sauna whereas this is always non-terminal but you have to pay for the Action later.



]

Another double pile! Like Racketeer and City Guard Djinn and Efreet are constantly in the Supply with 5 per "half-pile" .
This is obviously a thematically inspired idea. Djinn came pretty natural (might be nearly as good as Artisan but it is trickier to gain) whereas Efreet was a card that I came up with some time ago but never liked as it felt too strong. I put it fairly randomly on Efreet as I thought that getting it later in the game would nerf it enough and only then I realized some interesting stuff: you can gain Efreet via Wishes as long as you have a Djinn in play. Efreet makes alt-VP better so wishing for Duchies might be a strategy.
I am still not sure whether Efreet is balanced (I will also test it with "draw 3 cards instead of 5") or any good though.



All of these are thematically or mechanically inspired by other fan card designers.



The general idea for Phoenix/Ashes is by volfied. Phoenix is a strong card with the downside that it is weak in the opening and that you can only play it infrequently. This could also be implemented via the Journey token but it makes no thematic sense as opposed to the Phoenix dying and being reborn thing. Phoenix could be too similar to Den of Sins.






The lady asked for some Nightwatch cards after we first played with Night cards so here they are.
They are directly inspired by Gazbag's freeze mechanism .  The Season mechanic is by Asper and Cookielord.
White Walker is a variant of Yeti, Builder is the first version of Frost Spirit and Steward is Cold Storage.
There are 3 of each Brother and 6 White Walkers, shuffled together such that 3 Brothers are on top so the entire thing could be too random. I tried to make all cards versatile and fairly strong for their price to avoid that a bad card will prevent that the cards beneath it will see the sunlight.
Dragonglass Dagger is more of an afterthought, it is a Venture variant that can change the opening a bit like Doctor.

About the actual cards, Builder is a temporary pseudo-trasher, Ranger makes all Action cards next turn additional Fugitives and defends against the Walkers, Steward gains 5s that come into your deck a bit later, White Walker is a never-missing pseudo-trashing attack with a Rogue-like gain-from-freeze-limbo option.

I also used pacovf's suggestion for freeze as new keyword:







Nothing fancy, just a one-shot that distributes Blackmail. Getting a boon seems like a natural thing for a one-shot.





I need a village for my set so here it is. Like Extortioners is another way to spread Blackmails this is another way to get Traitors into the game. It is a bit like Blessed Village and Ill-Gotten Gains.
I tried to make the village effect non-standard because $4 for a village that junks when you gain it seemed too strong. Now it is either a Necropolis or a village that can draw from the discard pile and in case the opponents play BM or don't play a Vice Town during their turns you get an auto-Village next turn via Commanding (like when it gets used with Conjuration there is only one Commanding in play).

It looks like this is a way to emulate conditional durations (that can never occur or endure for more than just 1 turn) with the vanilla States. Of course there is also similar stuff you could do, e.g. you could take Beguild, i.e. the +1 Card State, when you gain a card such that the on-gain bonus becomes something like a conditional half Exploration.



Here are some cards that play with with the Conjuration States. They are more conceptual than the other ones and more about finding out whether the basic idea works or not:





A Silver+ for $4 is always a dubious notion. I think it works here though because the price of perhaps getting an extra Buy next turn (and with an even bigger perhaps, in future turns) is to play this as a Copper.





Kind of a reverse Relic. The buying of this will start something like a war of attrition: you don't really want that lousy Silver for $5 but you have to get it lest the other player gets a free Lab every turn.





Here we have something like an on-gain Treasury but this time you don't have to pay "too much" for a Silver but pay "too little" for a mere one-shot Fugitive to stop your opponent's Treasury for $2.
On-gain creates another mini-game though, under normal circumstances (i.e. no gainers and Remodel variants) you don't want to gain the 9th card (or 8th card in a 3P game) of the pile because then another player could empty the pile and get a safe Treasury for $2. No idea whether this is fun though.





This is unrelated to the Conjuration States and, once again, about Gazbag's great freezing mechanic.
The pile only contains 5 cards with Extinction being the 6th card underneath the 5 Mammoths. Like with Philosophers you don't want your opponent to get the last Mammoth.

About the duration effect, my Nightwatch Ranger is to Fugitive what Mammoth is to Asper's Scientist. Scientist  is based on Storyteller's idea of converting coins into cards. With Storyteller you convert existing Coins whereas with Scientist you backload it.
The entire idea could be totally broken, it is a card which needs quite some playtesting.





A simple idea, related to Coin of the Realms, for callable infinite Buys. Coppers and Curses have to be excluded to prevent the emptying of two piles (which would be even more broken with Gardens or Goons). A nice feature is that you cannot call the card in the turn you played it so in an engine where you need the extra Buys to get components you need at least 2 in your deck.
Infinite Buys sound crazy at first but the card is dead when you play it and you rarely want more than 2 or 3 Buys anyway. There is some funky stuff with Peddlers and cost reduction might also make it possible to pile drive. So one alternative to phrase the card that totally prevents easy pile driving via Coppers, Curses and cost reduction would be:
While this is in play, when  you a card that costs more than +1 Buy.





This is based on an idea by Seprix.
If you give it a fixed price it could be better than Province in some Kingdoms (e.g. if there are Attacks, Durations and Night cards this is better than Province as you can always buy a Curse to make Gate worth 7VPs). The variable/extra cost is a way to make the card a bit more interesting. Now you want to gain it when you have few different types in play yet your deck should have many different types.





Lich is inspiread by Kudasai's Old Witch but will play quite differently. It is a half-Curser, meaning that the first time you play it everybody else gets the negative VP and the second time the junk lands in their decks. In addition to that it is mainly a Copper trasher (you can put Curses on the mat to delay the inevitable or put a Silver there just like you would trash a Silver to make Forager better) and provides some scalable payload.

I am not sure about whether the card is good enough and shouldn't rather be buffed into a Night card or whether the whole mixture sucks, meaning that the half-cursing should be tacked onto something else.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2018, 03:20:31 pm by Holunder9 »
Logged

Andy7675

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
  • Respect: +2
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2018, 11:56:14 am »
0

For owl- You could make it cost 5, but topdeck the other revealed cards instead of discarding them. It would provide a functional purpose beyond simply getting Night cards.
Logged

Chappy7

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chappy7
  • Respect: +342
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2018, 01:01:04 pm »
0

While spectre would be particularly nasty with junkers and trashers, it becomes particularly friendly with good trash for benefit cards, or knights, or pillage etc...
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #3 on: January 27, 2018, 09:20:14 am »
0

Racketeer split pile- I don't really like how blackmail could be infinite debt without trashing or city guard. Maybe scrap city guard, and change blackmail?

Black Cat- neat idea like you said it is very similar to den of sin. I like the idea of multiple cards having the same Heirloom.

Owl- Interesting card seems like it could be strong but if you're using random with every set having the only hits being owl and key could be weak maybe? I would have to see how good owl is a getting coin tokens. Also what's the point of drawing victory cards, if you discard them anyway?

Spectre- Weird card, seems pretty weak if there are no trashers. Sitting order will matter a lot in any games where decent cards are trashed, Pillages, Remodel clones etc. Also in a two player game you could just remodel a province or anything with value to pin your opponent not to play this. 

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 567
  • Respect: +904
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #4 on: January 27, 2018, 01:55:59 pm »
0

Racketeer/City Guard/Blackmail - I don't really like Blackmail, it's too strong.  The reaction mechanic slows things down and has accountability issues.  I don't think a $5/$5 split pile works.  City Guard is interesting, but does seem a bit strong.  I dunno, try it by itself.

Conjuration - This seems like it has issues in the opener.  Like say I open 4/3, so I buy Destructive.  Then it turns out the second player has 5/2, so they buy Destructive, and now I just wasted a turn.

Royal Guard - seems fine, except that if there are no attacks you would never buy it.

Glacier - An interesting card.  Could maybe cost $5.  Something you could do with this card is trash it, which makes it kinda like Distant Lands.

Black Cat - I don't think this is that much like Den of Sin.  It's missing the drawback of staying out for 2 turns.  I think if you have extra gains, Black Cat just draws your deck very reliably, and I think that's too strong.

Nightmare & Spectre - My feeling is that attack cards should pair complex attacks with simple benefits, or complex benefits with simple attacks.  There's nothing about the attacks and benefits here that make them pair particularly well.  Spectre might be dominating in some games, if one player manages to thin down, and plays enough Spectres that the other player can never thin down.  I mean, I guess Ambassador is the same way.

Owl/Key - The ability of Owls to find each other is stronger than Minion.  And it's also cheaper, and can gain copies of itself.

Icelands - I like this idea a lot.  Useful in all kinds of decks, and I find myself wondering if you should green earlier because of it, or take a Duchy over Province.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #5 on: January 27, 2018, 02:12:41 pm »
0

I like a lot a lot these ideas, I like States in general so here's a few thoughts...

Conjuration: This is a really cool idea, although I think it might be good to have the States start off with some number of tokens on them, at least $5 for the stronger ones and maybe the weaker ones can get away with $0, this is to avoid the massive first player advantage of some of these States or more first player to have their $4/$5 opening hand advantage. I can see situations with Destructive for example where player one gets a 4/3 start and buys Destructive turn 1 for $4 and then player 2 can't get it until they hit $5 and by then player 1 has trashed like 4 cards and is miles ahead. 

Royal Guard: I feel like this should have a different effect than +$2 because it will almost never be bought over Silver in a game without attacks. Moat draws, Lighthouse and Guardian cost $2 and Guardian has the on-gain trick and Champion is Champion so all the other attack blocking things have some use without attacks.

I guess I should talk about the "freeze" things too.

Glacier: Eh, I still think mine is more interesting. I never really got the whole "alt-VP play" thing.

Icelands: 4 tokens per player isn't very much at all. I tried something like this and it wasn't too interesting, maybe there's something there though if you find the right balance.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #6 on: January 28, 2018, 04:24:26 am »
0

Thanks for all the feedback.  :)

I am not sure that Conjuration will start out with a player spending all of his Coins on it. Say you got a 4/3 opening but there is a decent 2 in the Kingdom. Perhaps you would use your first turn to buy 2 States with only one token on them whereas the second player will start 5/2 and buy a 5.
On the other hand you want to spend a lot on the better States to not have them quickly taken away from you.
I am not sure that the suggestion to have an initial amount of tokens on the States fixes the opening problems unless you make it 6 or more which is too much for the weaker States.
Seems tricky to fix.

While spectre would be particularly nasty with junkers and trashers, it becomes particularly friendly with good trash for benefit cards, or knights, or pillage etc...
Thanks for the tip to make Owl not discard the other cards, I changed it accordingly. The new version makes it harder to dig for for several Owls in a row and is more about preparing a better hand for the next turn.

About Blackmail, while I am far from sure that the concept works, Racketeer and City Guard are both constantly available so you can always defend yourself against Racketeer attacks via buying City Guards.
If the attack is strong and the defense is strong as well, partially due to the decent secondary option, the only issue is that the double pile will empty quickly. This is why I should probably add a rule that the double pile counts as one pile.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #7 on: January 28, 2018, 10:05:05 am »
0

Hm... I kinda like both the idea of States that only one player can have, and also the idea of States you can buy. I'm just not sure I like the combination, where you take away another player's state. Personally, I'd prefer States that you can get as a reward Tournament-Style, or states where there are enough copies for every player. Like:

Luck, Event, 4$
Once per game: Take Lucky, but not from another player.

Lucky, State
At the end of your cleanup phase, you may put your deck in your discard pile.

I hope I'll get around to posting my take on this soon.

Racketeer and Blackmail remind me a lot of a concept Co0kieL0rd once did.

I kinda like Glacier better than the original one, probably because it's closer to my ideal version that's just VP without any secondary tokens.

Peace looks nice. I like it.

Nightmare, Owl and Spectre lost me while I was reading them due to having too much text on them.

I'm not sure Owl is enough to warrant Key not just being a Treasure that says 0$, take a Coin token.

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #8 on: January 28, 2018, 10:47:58 am »
+1

I kinda like Glacier better than the original one, probably because it's closer to my ideal version that's just VP without any secondary tokens.
This is interesting to me, because I can't understand why another bland Victory card seems to be liked more than a unique Coin token stockpile thing. I hesitate to hijack this topic and just talk about my own card but you posted a variant on it so I assume nobody would mind.

Glacier (my version) actually predated Ice tokens and originally just had the Coin tokens on it and then when I got the idea for Ice tokens I kind of went back and saw that this could use them and everything. I can understand wanting just 1 type of token to be used but by all means, if you play with Glacier, just put Coin tokens on it to save effort. Ice tokens just move lots of words from the card into the rulebook.

Onto the difference in effect of Coin vs VP tokens... Would someone be able to explain to me why they prefer the VP tokens? I just don't get it, In money/sloggy games this just seems like it's way better than Duchy and in an engine game I'd only consider it if I really needed to drag out the game and get enough points to overtake a Province-rush player. It just doesn't seem to add anything new to me. Am I missing something?
Logged

Accatitippi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1145
  • Shuffle iT Username: Accatitippi
  • Silver is underraided
  • Respect: +1762
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #9 on: January 28, 2018, 05:11:16 pm »
0

Luck, Event, 4$
Once per game: Take Lucky, but not from another player.

This makes me think, can I take Miserable from another player?
I think I can.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #10 on: January 28, 2018, 05:28:59 pm »
+1

I kinda like Glacier better than the original one, probably because it's closer to my ideal version that's just VP without any secondary tokens.
This is interesting to me, because I can't understand why another bland Victory card seems to be liked more than a unique Coin token stockpile thing. I hesitate to hijack this topic and just talk about my own card but you posted a variant on it so I assume nobody would mind.

Glacier (my version) actually predated Ice tokens and originally just had the Coin tokens on it and then when I got the idea for Ice tokens I kind of went back and saw that this could use them and everything. I can understand wanting just 1 type of token to be used but by all means, if you play with Glacier, just put Coin tokens on it to save effort. Ice tokens just move lots of words from the card into the rulebook.

Onto the difference in effect of Coin vs VP tokens... Would someone be able to explain to me why they prefer the VP tokens? I just don't get it, In money/sloggy games this just seems like it's way better than Duchy and in an engine game I'd only consider it if I really needed to drag out the game and get enough points to overtake a Province-rush player. It just doesn't seem to add anything new to me. Am I missing something?
You won't buy either Glacier if the game is about to end end. Your Glacier is kind of a auto-baker for 4 turns so you can buy the card early and perhaps later remodel it. My Glacier is pure VP so you want it later but not too late lest the game ends before get all the VPs and remodel it.
This conflict between not wanting to get Glaciers too early as it is only VP and not wanting to get it too late as you cannot get the VPs makes the card, at least to me, potentially interesting.
If there is a Remodel (variant) your card plays easier: just get them relatively early, keep your economy afloat due to the Coin tokens and when the card lands in your deck remodel it.
And if there is no Remodel it is at least 2VPs whereas mine hurts more if it remains an unremodeled Estate.

So without wanting to imply that my version is superior, unique, less bland or whatever (I don't think that either card reinvents the wheel, plenty of alt-VP exist and like your card Mill is about Coins and VPs) - whether you prefer the first or second version seems to depend on what you enjoy more: greening earlier or later, smoother or harsher impacts for your economy respectively safer vs. more risky play.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #11 on: January 28, 2018, 05:55:26 pm »
0

The thing is, I think it's interesting to have a VP card that is a bit expensive for the amount of VP it gives, but with the advantage of staying out of your shuffle. It is also interesting to buy a supply of Coin tokens that you receive over several turns. Mixing two interesting abilities gives you less than the sum of its parts, because now neither ability can really shine. You never get one without the other. It's part of what makes Split Piles and Travellers less appealing to me: You never see Fugitive without Teacher, or Hero without Warrior. Of course some of those cards, like Page, could never exist without their counterparts - but the abilities on Glacier can.

I feel that Holunder9's Glacier is closer to staying with one mechanic, because, after all, it's still VP. I'd still prefer a version that gives you something good now, and something bad (the card itself) later, without having this challenge of hitting a sweet spot that's still somehow not all that sweet.

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #12 on: January 29, 2018, 12:09:22 pm »
+2

Okay I think it's more of a psychological thing than some kind of strategy or something with the cards that I'm not seeing. It probably would have been better if I'd just made my Glacier be a $6 Copper instead of a Victory, Glacier just wanted to be a weak stop card and I figured a Victory was the most interesting version of that, but apparently it made people think that it being a victory that doesn't enter your deck straight away way the main point of the card.

Thanks for the thoughtful responses!

Anyway about Peace:

I think it probably needs some kind of limit on how many VP's you can get or something. I think it's just going to make games last for ages because there's no incentive to get Victories when you can just keep building and building and turn all the excess money into VP. It's kind of like Groundskeeper in that way.
Logged

trivialknot

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 567
  • Respect: +904
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #13 on: January 29, 2018, 07:49:13 pm »
+1

Here's some elaboration on my thoughts on Blackmail.  I say it's too strong because junkers are already on the strong side, and these are clearly worse than curses.  Imagine playing a 3-4 player game, where you end up with ~7 of these, and you can't even afford a City Guard anymore.  There's also the possibility of being pinned, and although I'm not sure how likely it is, it doesn't seem like fun.

And besides that, the reaction upon draw has issues.  Now I need to pay attention every time I draw cards, and players need to be honest about what they're drawing.  As an alternative, you could have a person reveal their hand at the end of their turn, or at the end of the buy phase, and take a debt for each Blackmail.  You could even have it trigger on buy, like Haunted Woods or Swamp Hag, which would eliminate the pinning potential.  Or it could be a cantrip that gives you debt, so it would be junk, but not the kind that takes up space in your deck.

I don't really like the idea of pairing Blackmail with City Guard.  City Guard has its own unrelated ability, which is interesting and strong enough on its own.  If Blackmail needs to always be paired with some defense, then I don't think an unrelated $5-cost is a good choice.  Worth noting that among the canonical cards, most reaction cards are cheap and terminal.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2018, 05:35:57 am »
+2

Here's some elaboration on my thoughts on Blackmail.  I say it's too strong because junkers are already on the strong side, and these are clearly worse than curses.  Imagine playing a 3-4 player game, where you end up with ~7 of these, and you can't even afford a City Guard anymore.  There's also the possibility of being pinned, and although I'm not sure how likely it is, it doesn't seem like fun.

And besides that, the reaction upon draw has issues.  Now I need to pay attention every time I draw cards, and players need to be honest about what they're drawing.  As an alternative, you could have a person reveal their hand at the end of their turn, or at the end of the buy phase, and take a debt for each Blackmail.  You could even have it trigger on buy, like Haunted Woods or Swamp Hag, which would eliminate the pinning potential.  Or it could be a cantrip that gives you debt, so it would be junk, but not the kind that takes up space in your deck.

I don't really like the idea of pairing Blackmail with City Guard.  City Guard has its own unrelated ability, which is interesting and strong enough on its own.  If Blackmail needs to always be paired with some defense, then I don't think an unrelated $5-cost is a good choice.  Worth noting that among the canonical cards, most reaction cards are cheap and terminal.
You are totally right that Blackmail can become extremly nasty which might break its back in playtesting.
You noted that City Guard is strong if you use it for the non-defensive option and this is an intentional design choice to make people buy City Guard prophylactically in the absence of other trashers respectively buy City Guard before you buy Racketeer. Even if nobody goes for Racketeer the card is decent whereas e.g. Moat only becomes OK with enough village support.
About the cheating, different backs easily prevent that. Plus honest folks in your gaming group.



Some changes and a new card:

Chappy7 pointed out that Spectre is bad if good stuff lands in the trash so I changed Spectre to only junk cards from the trash that cost up to 2.
Owl got nerfed (really?) a different Victory condition (from DXV's Secret History). It is in general a difficult condition to meet but Owl can be used as economy.



Azure Cove
is new and might be too similar to Avanto. Avanto is only non-terminal if you draw into Sauna whereas this is always non-terminal but you have to pay for the Action later.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2018, 02:35:22 am by Holunder9 »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #15 on: January 30, 2018, 07:51:24 am »
0

Minor thing: It's this order:
+Cards
+Actions
+Buy
+Coin

Azure Cove reminds me of my Hunter, just less complex - it looks balanced to me.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #16 on: January 30, 2018, 05:31:33 pm »
0

Some of these, I really really like.  The bribe attack and the Duration-smithy the most.

Some of them I dislike for reasons I dislike certain official cards (Fool, Cursed Village) so what can I say
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #17 on: January 30, 2018, 06:05:09 pm »
0

Azure Cove seems very strong to me. It's basically a Smithy that you don't have to line up with your Villages, I know that doesn't sound like much, but the flexibility and consistency it gives is immense. In a money deck you can't draw dead actions with it, I guess it's similar to Werewolf in that situation. You can do other things like playing a bunch at once and then letting them back into your deck on off turns - sort of like a Tactician type thing. You can also do lots of tricks with it by playing the same one multiple times in 1 turn, which doesn't seem too hard to pull of with this. I mean there are loads of broken $5 Smithies so it's probably not too good, but it's really good!

I think the discard trigger should be limited to the end of your action phase, or at least to during your turn to avoid weirdness with Caravan Guard (or any other way to get +actions on opponents turns).
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2018, 04:31:10 am »
0

Thansk guys, I changed Azure Cove.
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #19 on: February 03, 2018, 12:38:04 am »
0

Azure Cove- Being able to use it as a normal smithy before or after a village, and pawning it off for a turn(s) to high roll seems nuts. Probably won't be as strong in a kingdom without a decent muit-action card.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #20 on: February 03, 2018, 06:31:41 am »
0

Two Azure Coves give you unbounded amounts of money with the +1$ and +1 Action token on their pile. Also with Certain champion combinations. It's relatively easy to fix by making it "call" or only allowing it in your cleanup phase.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2018, 03:31:12 pm »
0

Two Azure Coves give you unbounded amounts of money with the +1$ and +1 Action token on their pile. Also with Certain champion combinations. It's relatively easy to fix by making it "call" or only allowing it in your cleanup phase.
Good spot. It is a combo that could easily be fixed via forbidding Azure Cove to be present together with Peasant/Lost Arts, Peasant/Training, Lost Arts/Training, Page/Peasant and Page/Training.
But I worry that even in other Kingdoms the 'play several times per turn' of the card might be too good. Throne Room + Azure Cove nets 4 cards and an Action which you can spend to discard Azure Cove. If I understand the "lose track" rule correctly, which I am never sure of, you are even be able to discard Azure Cove after you played it the first time with Throne Room (as my rule said that you can discard it at any time). This could lead to weird stuff like drawing a just Throned Azure Cove.

The idea to use a card several times per turn was dubious from the start. I fixed the card and used Wine Merchant's wording (discarding it at the end of your Action phase might lead to some issues with Villa).





Another double pile! Like Racketeer and City Guard Djinn and Efreet are constantly in the Supply with 5 per "half-pile" .
This is obviously a thematically inspired idea (yeah, you figured, I played Heroes of Might and Magic 3 back in the days). Djinn came pretty natural (might be nearly as good as Artisan but it is trickier to gain) whereas Efreet was a card that I came up with some time ago but never liked as it felt too strong. I put it fairly randomly on Efreet as I thought that making it harder to get would nerf it enough and only then I realized some interesting, unintended stuff: you can gain Efreet via Wishes as long as you have a Djinn in play. Efreet makes alt-VP better so wishing for Duchies might be a strategy.
I am still not sure whether Efreet is balanced (I will also test it with "draw 3 cards instead of 5") or any good though.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1086
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +842
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #22 on: February 08, 2018, 12:23:31 am »
0

I like Efreet, but Djinn is definitely too strong for $5. Artisan costs $6 and makes you put a card on your deck. Wishes gain cards costing up to $6 (Artisan is up to $5).
Efreet is very strong, but I think it's balanced enough by costing $6 and needing a Djinn. But needing a Magic Lamp is not enough of a drawback for Djinn.

On another note, my favorite card of yours is Owl, although I think it needs tweaking (as-is, it's probably too strong for $4 and too weak for $5). I'd suggesting moving the hex mechanic to Djinn, have Djinn say either "Receieve a hex. Gain a Wish" or "You may receieve a hex to gain a Wish" with some simple alternate effect. Then do something a little different with Owl.

majiponi

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
  • Respect: +321
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #23 on: February 08, 2018, 01:14:42 am »
0

I like Efreet, but Djinn is definitely too strong for $5. Artisan costs $6 and makes you put a card on your deck. Wishes gain cards costing up to $6 (Artisan is up to $5).
Efreet is very strong, but I think it's balanced enough by costing $6 and needing a Djinn. But needing a Magic Lamp is not enough of a drawback for Djinn.

On another note, my favorite card of yours is Owl, although I think it needs tweaking (as-is, it's probably too strong for $4 and too weak for $5). I'd suggesting moving the hex mechanic to Djinn, have Djinn say either "Receieve a hex. Gain a Wish" or "You may receieve a hex to gain a Wish" with some simple alternate effect. Then do something a little different with Owl.

How about "You may play a Magic Lamp from your hand. If you do, gain a wish." clause?
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2018, 06:03:05 am »
+1

How about "You may play a Magic Lamp from your hand. If you do, gain a wish." clause?
That sounds good but I don't want Djinn to prevent the cashing in Magic Lamp and obviously I don't want the opposite either, Djinn to be dead once Magic Lamp is gone.
I could do something like force-trashing Magic Lamp when you gain Djinn such that you have to decide whether you wanna go for the 3 Wishes one-shot thing or constantly gain Wishes via Djinn. But being able to get a maximum of one Djinn seems to restricted. One idea is after all that you wanna gain "too many" Djinns such that it becomes more likely to gain Efreet.

I like Efreet, but Djinn is definitely too strong for $5. Artisan costs $6 and makes you put a card on your deck. Wishes gain cards costing up to $6 (Artisan is up to $5).
Efreet is very strong, but I think it's balanced enough by costing $6 and needing a Djinn. But needing a Magic Lamp is not enough of a drawback for Djinn.
Artisan gains the card to hand and then forces you to topdeck a card which is stronger than merely gaining a $5. You can either immediately play the gained card or you'll topdeck it and play it next turn.
This is probably stronger than gaining a Wish which is more admittedly more flexible, allows you to gain $6s but can be drawn dead.
But you are probably right that Djinn is nonetheless too strong.

On another note, my favorite card of yours is Owl, although I think it needs tweaking (as-is, it's probably too strong for $4 and too weak for $5).
I tried to nerf it via making the 2 VPs conditional on no Silvers in your deck instead of the more or less automatic 2VPs (1VP per empty pile with Provinces and Owls being empty in most games) of the first version but it still feels, as you said, like something between $4 and $5. Perhaps undoing the Victory card and making it a pure Baker-Scout thing?
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1086
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +842
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2018, 11:04:22 pm »
0

On another note, my favorite card of yours is Owl, although I think it needs tweaking (as-is, it's probably too strong for $4 and too weak for $5).
I tried to nerf it via making the 2 VPs conditional on no Silvers in your deck instead of the more or less automatic 2VPs (1VP per empty pile with Provinces and Owls being empty in most games) of the first version but it still feels, as you said, like something between $4 and $5. Perhaps undoing the Victory card and making it a pure Baker-Scout thing?
I like the victory part. There aren't any official night-victory cards. You could easily make it cost $5. Then you can return the VP to how it was originally, and maybe say "You may put any victory and night cards into your hand."
(Having no silvers could occasionally be easier than having more than one empty pile, but the no-silver condition is weird.)
OTOH, I also like that it costs less than $5, so it may be worth dropping the VP to keep it at $4.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #26 on: February 12, 2018, 02:13:12 am »
+1

On another note, my favorite card of yours is Owl, although I think it needs tweaking (as-is, it's probably too strong for $4 and too weak for $5).
I tried to nerf it via making the 2 VPs conditional on no Silvers in your deck instead of the more or less automatic 2VPs (1VP per empty pile with Provinces and Owls being empty in most games) of the first version but it still feels, as you said, like something between $4 and $5. Perhaps undoing the Victory card and making it a pure Baker-Scout thing?
I like the victory part. There aren't any official night-victory cards. You could easily make it cost $5. Then you can return the VP to how it was originally, and maybe say "You may put any victory and night cards into your hand."
(Having no silvers could occasionally be easier than having more than one empty pile, but the no-silver condition is weird.)
OTOH, I also like that it costs less than $5, so it may be worth dropping the VP to keep it at $4.
I am fixated on a price of $4 as the entire thing with the Heirloom exists to make this a more attractive opener. So I probably have to get rid of the VP part if I wanna salvage the idea or start from scratch. Owls scout for Night cards anyway so it being a Victory c ard doesn't feel all that organic.
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1081
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1014
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2018, 03:21:00 pm »
0

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

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

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

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #28 on: February 14, 2018, 01:27:33 am »
0

I'm in for trashing a Magic Lamp to get 1 Djinn per player, moving Efreet to outtakes or redesign limbo.

Do what's right for the card.   The other card can't be so cool to make such sacrifices.

I mean not that I understand what is interesting about a 6$ nonterminal with a buy restriction reading "You need to have a specific power 5 terminal in play to buy this", that's pretty close to "Feodum for Gold" on the list of things-you-wanted-to-do-anyway. 
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #29 on: February 14, 2018, 01:41:11 am »
0

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
I doubt that you want to give your opponents Djinn unless you hit a Duchy late in the game.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #30 on: February 14, 2018, 11:33:10 am »
0

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
I doubt that you want to give your opponents Djinn unless you hit a Duchy late in the game.
Ok.  That happens though.  So it's a valid point.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #31 on: February 14, 2018, 12:43:10 pm »
+1

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
I doubt that you want to give your opponents Djinn unless you hit a Duchy late in the game.
Ok.  That happens though.  So it's a valid point.
Sure, but I don't see any actual rule problems. The only seemingly relevant case is hitting a Duchy in the late game in the absence of any other 5s in the Kingdom which leads to the same thing as Swindler hitting a Shelter: the attacked player trashes the card but gains nothing.



About Djinn/Efreet, thanks for all the tips. I will have to test these new versions as well as the old version before I settle on anything (which is probably getting rid of the idea altogether):



The problems are obvious: playing for Magic Lamp and the 3 Wishes might be better than going for Djinn. While gaining Efreets was initially too hard it might be too easy now (not at least because you don't have to go for it via the Djinn path).
About the Efreet wording, I know that it is awkward but I did not find a technically correct way to word it that did not sound convoluted.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #32 on: February 14, 2018, 01:04:54 pm »
0

Hmm Djinn just seems like a more boring Leprechaun to me. You know like a hard to get Wish gainer but it's a bit more luck based whether you get $5 with a Magic Lamp soon enough and it doesn't have any other use.

Efreet is a bit odd, I guess your supposed to store up victories with it and then discard them all for a bunch of vp? The abilities don't really seem connected apart from that. It's basically just a weird unlimited Gear kinda thing that randomly gets destroyed by Militias?
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #33 on: February 14, 2018, 01:34:28 pm »
0

I think Djinn is fine, but it suffers a lot from the fact that Pottery exists (that's the name, right? I'm out of touch). For if I was to suggest a way to improve it, it would be by just making the card cost 6$, at which point it's a Pottery that trades fast access to the gained cards with the ability to gain copies of itself, and one type of flexibility with another. Maybe it could just cost 5$ with some beneficial player interaction instead of the gain restriction? Like setting aside a Boon (that doesn't give $) at the start, which it always gives oto the other players on gain? Or just a random Boon to save on words.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #34 on: February 14, 2018, 01:39:43 pm »
0

Hmm Djinn just seems like a more boring Leprechaun to me. You know like a hard to get Wish gainer but it's a bit more luck based whether you get $5 with a Magic Lamp soon enough and it doesn't have any other use.

Efreet is a bit odd, I guess your supposed to store up victories with it and then discard them all for a bunch of vp? The abilities don't really seem connected apart from that. It's basically just a weird unlimited Gear kinda thing that randomly gets destroyed by Militias?
Yeah, discard Victory cards for VPs and transfering other cards into the next turn is the main purpose and you are totally right that the card is weak in the presence of handsize attacks.
I don't see the oddity or weirdness. There is some self-synergy if you use the second option and in the next turn the first option but you can also ignore the first option and mainly use it for card transfer.

The problem I see though is that the card might be too strong in alt-VP or draw-your-deck engines. Nonterminal VP generation should either be conditional (Groundskeeper) or appear late enough in the game to not become dominant (Plunder). With Efreet you could green a bit but then stop and play your Efreet engine without having any incentive to end the game.
I tried to reign that in via making the card hard to gain but only playtesting will show whether the restriction is severe enough to not make this a game-breaking powerhouse.


I think Djinn is fine, but it suffers a lot from the fact that Pottery exists (that's the name, right? I'm out of touch). For if I was to suggest a way to improve it, it would be by just making the card cost 6$, at which point it's a Pottery that trades fast access to the gained cards with the ability to gain copies of itself, and one type of flexibility with another. Maybe it could just cost 5$ with some beneficial player interaction instead of the gain restriction? Like setting aside a Boon (that doesn't give $) at the start, which it always gives oto the other players on gain? Or just a random Boon to save on words.
Yeah, it is (too?) similar to Artisan. As the origin of the card is thematic I want to connect it with Magic Lamp. Without that thematic weight what you suggest could of course lead to a mechanically sounder card.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #35 on: February 15, 2018, 03:26:02 am »
0

To add two more to that pile of my cents, I feel that theme is a great way to start developing a card (giving you a source of inspiration), but it's not a great idea to enforce it at the cost of mechanics (in Dominion and similar games, that is). If you were to think that a fix that ignores the lamp makes for a more sound card, just give it another name. You can still use that name as an inspiration for yet another card (although admittedly I have a hard timme thinking of a Djinn-named card that doesn't use Wishes at all).

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1081
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1014
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #36 on: February 15, 2018, 08:04:49 am »
0

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
I doubt that you want to give your opponents Djinn unless you hit a Duchy late in the game.
That's not the point; the point is what happens if I Swindle your $5 card and ask you to take a Djinn in response? Swindler allows me to do that, because Djinn is a $5 card in the Supply; Djinn tells you you can't do that because you can't gain it without a Magic Lamp in play. So the logical conclusion is probably that I swindle your $5 card into nothing, which is not a wanted interaction.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

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

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

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #37 on: February 15, 2018, 01:13:44 pm »
0

"You cannot gain this unless..." has awkward interactions with Swindler.
I doubt that you want to give your opponents Djinn unless you hit a Duchy late in the game.
That's not the point; the point is what happens if I Swindle your $5 card and ask you to take a Djinn in response? Swindler allows me to do that, because Djinn is a $5 card in the Supply; Djinn tells you you can't do that because you can't gain it without a Magic Lamp in play. So the logical conclusion is probably that I swindle your $5 card into nothing, which is not a wanted interaction.
Now I get your point. But it is still not an issue. Gain restrictions on Supply cards are new so there are no official rules concerning the order.
Naturally you should check Djinn's "gainability" first before you gain it. You should not be able to gain Djinn in any way, check for the gain condition afterwards and then somehow retroactively undo the gain.
So the Swindler player would choose Djinn as target but the card says that it is not gainable and the attacker would have to choose a different card just like he'd have to choose Copper once the Curse pile is empty when he hits a 0.

It works precisely like Grand Market's buy restriction. You cannot spend 6 Coin and a Buy on Grand Market, only then check for whether you can buy GM or not, then undo the buy with your resources being gone (not that anybody would do that). The game rather says that it is not possible to buy GM BEFORE you buy it just like the game would say that Djinn cannot be gained BEFORE the Swindler player chooses Djinn.

Djinn is basically a borderline Supply / non-Supply card as you can only gain it via a specific way. If you want to you can probably rephrase the card as a non-Supply card with the only way to gain it being written on the card instead of on the gainer as it is usually the case with non-Supply cards.
I actually thought about making Djinn and Efreets non-Supply cards when I came up with them but it seemed rule-wise more confusing than clarifying.
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1081
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1014
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #38 on: February 15, 2018, 03:20:22 pm »
0

It works precisely like Grand Market's buy restriction.
Well, the key difference between Gaining and Buying - and what allows Grand Market's buy restriction to exist at all - is that buying is always an active choice on the part of the player. You can't be forced into Buying a card by some other effect.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

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

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

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #39 on: February 15, 2018, 04:33:09 pm »
0

It works precisely like Grand Market's buy restriction.
Well, the key difference between Gaining and Buying - and what allows Grand Market's buy restriction to exist at all - is that buying is always an active choice on the part of the player. You can't be forced into Buying a card by some other effect.
Game mechanics care little about whether you "actively" buy a card while you are in your Buy phase or whether you "passively" make a choice about what cards the other players gain while you play Swindler. From a mechanical point of view these adjectives are irrelevant and both situations are identical: the game waits for player input.

In both cases you might want to do something but you cannot do it because Grand Market respectively Djinn forbid it.
This isn't complicated and there is no rule issue unless you are set on creating one. Of course the the wording can be improved and while I did not see how Djinn/Efreet might very well be better implemented as non-Supply cards. But that's the least issue these cards have.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #40 on: February 15, 2018, 04:40:51 pm »
0

It works precisely like Grand Market's buy restriction.
Well, the key difference between Gaining and Buying - and what allows Grand Market's buy restriction to exist at all - is that buying is always an active choice on the part of the player. You can't be forced into Buying a card by some other effect.
Game mechanics care little about whether you "actively" buy a card while you are in your Buy phase or whether you "passively" make a choice about what cards the other players gain while you play Swindler. From a mechanical point of view these adjectives are irrelevant and both situations are identical: the game waits for player input.

In both cases you might want to do something but you cannot do it because Grand Market respectively Djinn forbid it.
This isn't complicated and there is no rule issue unless you are set on creating one. Of course the the wording can be improved and while I did not see how Djinn/Efreet might very well be better implemented as non-Supply cards. But that's the least issue these cards have.

I'm no rules expert but Smugglers with an empty pile leads me to believe that you would be able to choose Djinn with Swindler and have your opponent gain nothing. I'm not sure whether that's actually a problem though.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #41 on: February 17, 2018, 08:10:03 pm »
0

If you can even mount an argument about it, and the card is in the design phase, you should reword it so it is abundantly clear.  That's part of good, quality game design.  It doesn't matter if players can make a correct, unambiguous decision using a full and complete understanding of the official rules (well, you are even worse off if they can't, but that's not "the bar").  Where possible, you should make the card so clear no one asks questions.

"You can't buy this unless you have a Magic Lamp in play.  When you gain this, trash all Magic Lamps from play" is the same number of words and has the same exact play aside from Border Village, Storyteller, Black Market, Horn of Plenty and Haggler, which is a 5 card list but I'm pretty sure is in single digit percentage of boards.

That's another thing, you should make it abundantly clear whether you trash all Magic Lamps from play, or just one.  "Trash Magic Lamp" is like, only one has ever existed or will exist so it doesn't matter.

Ok, I thought of the night cards too, Vampire and Changeling.  The other option has some word cost, "When you gain this, trash it if you don't have a Magic Lamp in play".  But it works with the rules more gracefully.

Or if you want to be super Melvin (is Melvin the name for people that like dovetailed mechanics? Vorthos vs. Melvin I think it's called)  "When you gain this, trash it or a Magic Lamp you have in play."
« Last Edit: February 17, 2018, 08:19:39 pm by popsofctown »
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #42 on: February 18, 2018, 09:18:58 am »
0

"You can't buy this unless you have a Magic Lamp in play.  When you gain this, trash all Magic Lamps from play" is the same number of words and has the same exact play aside from Border Village, Storyteller, Black Market, Horn of Plenty and Haggler, which is a 5 card list but I'm pretty sure is in single digit percentage of boards.
Not really. You forgot Vampire, Artisan, Altar, all Remodel variants and above all Wishes which implies that Djinn can indirectly gain itself. That's the last thing I want Djinn to be as it would be obviously broken (there is a reason direct gainers like Artisan, Vampire cannot gain themselves).
As I already said, I am open for better wording but not if it completly changes the way the card is supposed to work.

Djinn should come out of the bottle and if this is too thematic and cannot be made to work mechanically (which is my main worry) the idea will land in the trash.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #43 on: February 18, 2018, 11:48:05 pm »
0

Altar + Storyteller + Djinn is a 3 card specified board.  Magic Lamp is hard to get in play before an Action gainer is played since it's a Treasure.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #44 on: February 19, 2018, 02:47:28 am »
+2

Djinn should come out of the bottle and if this is too thematic and cannot be made to work mechanically (which is my main worry) the idea will land in the trash.

Story time: This is exactly the theme behind my Homunculus trashing a Potion on gain. Just that it didn't have that theme originally. I renamed the card when I thought that the Potion thing would be the best way to solve its issues, which is pretty much what I said about theme being something you should be willing to change if it makes you end up with a better card. Theme is nice, but if theme is the only reason you want to do a card, I'm not sure it's such a great fit for Dominion. It's not a very thematic game.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #45 on: February 19, 2018, 06:09:58 am »
0

Altar + Storyteller + Djinn is a 3 card specified board.  Magic Lamp is hard to get in play before an Action gainer is played since it's a Treasure.
You seem to be confused. Your suggested Buy restriction would not prevent Djinn from being gained via Altar or Wishes or any other gainer which is why it does not work.

Theme is nice, but if theme is the only reason you want to do a card, I'm not sure it's such a great fit for Dominion. It's not a very thematic game.
That's why I will get rid of the idea if it doesn't work. Having slightly ambiguous rules (I really don't see the unclear cases and neither did my playing group in the two games in whcih I tried it so far but then again I am no rules expert) is not the issue of the card though.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5207
  • Respect: +2671
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #46 on: February 19, 2018, 06:13:43 am »
0

Oh, derp.  True.
Logged
Also you probably are an expert if you buy two bureaucrats early.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #47 on: February 19, 2018, 06:17:52 am »
0

If the card is salvageable, which I seriously doubt after the two games, I am going to try to word it as non-Supply card. Because as you all said, there is definitely something fishy about the current wording.
Logged

faust

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1975
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +2766
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #48 on: February 19, 2018, 07:27:38 am »
0

"You can't buy this unless you have a Magic Lamp in play.  When you gain this, trash all Magic Lamps from play" is the same number of words and has the same exact play aside from Border Village, Storyteller, Black Market, Horn of Plenty and Haggler, which is a 5 card list but I'm pretty sure is in single digit percentage of boards.
Not really. You forgot Vampire, Artisan, Altar, all Remodel variants and above all Wishes which implies that Djinn can indirectly gain itself. That's the last thing I want Djinn to be as it would be obviously broken (there is a reason direct gainers like Artisan, Vampire cannot gain themselves).
As I already said, I am open for better wording but not if it completly changes the way the card is supposed to work.

Djinn should come out of the bottle and if this is too thematic and cannot be made to work mechanically (which is my main worry) the idea will land in the trash.

How about: "When you gain this during your turn, if you have no Magic Lamp in play, return it to the supply." Fixes Swindler issues while keeping with the desired mechanic. The only issue that it might still have is some lose-track stuff that would prevent it from being returned to the supply.
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.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #49 on: February 21, 2018, 10:02:28 am »
0

Time for some new cards.  All of them thematically or mechanically inspired by other fan card designers.



The general idea for Phoenix/Ashes is by volfied. Phoenix is a strong card with the downside that it is weak in the opening and that you can only play it infrequently. This could also be implemented via the Journey token but it makes no thematic sense as opposed to the Phoenix dying and being reborn thing. Phoenix could be too similar to Den of Sins.






The lady asked for some Nightwatch cards after we first played with Night cards so here they are.
They are directly inspired by Gazbag's freeze mechanism . The Season mechanic is by Asper and Cookielord.
White Walker is a variant of Yeti, Builder is the first version of Frost Spirit and Steward is Cold Storage.
There are 3 of each Brother and 6 White Walkers, shuffled together such that 3 Brothers are on top so the entire thing could be too random. I tried to make all cards versatile and fairly strong for their price to avoid that a bad card will prevent that the cards beneath it will see the sunlight.
Dragonglass Dagger is more of an afterthought, it is a Venture variant that can change the opening a bit like Doctor.

About the actual cards, Builder is a temporary pseudo-trasher, Ranger makes all Action cards next turn additional Fugitives and defends against the Walkers, Steward gains 5s that come into your deck a bit later, White Walker is a never-missing pseudo-trashing attack with a Rogue-like gain-from-freeze-limbo option.

I also used pacovf's suggestion for freeze as new keyword:

Logged

majiponi

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
  • Respect: +321
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #50 on: February 21, 2018, 11:03:56 am »
0

Does Phoenix need draw and set aside?

Quote
For each 2 different named cards in play, set aside the top card of your deck.

How about this phrase?
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #51 on: February 21, 2018, 09:00:01 pm »
0

Phoenix- So if you have phoenix, copper and two different cards it just turns into a pretty bad den of sins. You would need at least 8+ different cards cards in play to get some good value with the ashes downside in my book, while anything 5 or below seems pretty bad. Seems like a hard card to use well in a deck, and it doesn't look to work well in most kingdoms, but maybe I am underestimating the average amount of different cards in play.

The Night's Watch- No comment, just since the huge amount of different mechanics and I am not even sure how the night's watch card itself works. Might comment later on it, if you keep updating it.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #52 on: February 22, 2018, 02:12:37 am »
0

The Night's Watch is just the randomizer card. Phoenix is intentionally not good in the opening and the obvious Action card benchmark that'd compensate for the exchanging would be:

Phoenix: +2 Action +3 Cards | When you discard this from play, exchange this for an Ashes.
Ashes: Exchange this for Phoenix.


So the critical number of differently named cards is 6 or 7. That doesn't seem to be too tricky too achieve unless it is a money Kingdom but the line still doesn't provide the Action you have to waste on Ashes. So back to the drawing board.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #53 on: February 22, 2018, 08:51:35 am »
+1

Here is a new version of Phoenix that is based on a card tested by DXV for Cornucopia (Nocturne does feel a bit like Cornucopia 2.0 with Conclave, Imp and Magic Lamp):



I guess this will draw around 3-4 cards on average so a bit of extra draw compared to the first version which should compensate for Ashes being terminal.
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #54 on: February 22, 2018, 11:24:06 am »
0

Here is a new version of Phoenix that is based on a card tested by DXV for Cornucopia (Nocturne does feel a bit like Cornucopia 2.0 with Conclave, Imp and Magic Lamp):



I guess this will draw around 3-4 cards on average so a bit of extra draw compared to the first version which should compensate for Ashes being terminal.

Phoenix- This version might be a bit stronger but it's still looks weakish early game, but I guess it would help cycling your deck. Also, this version might be too similar to den of sins. The current Phoenix/ashes design might make it to comparable/similar to den of sins and might not be strong enough for the ashes downside. What if you lower the strength level of Phoenix and higher the strength level of ashes? Then again keeping the burst of power in the phoenix half is not a bad idea just not a huge fan of the current effect.

Random bad card idea-
Name - Phoenix
Type - Action/Night
Cost- 6
Effect- If it's your night phase, take three Coin Tokens. Otherwise, discard and exchange this for an ashes. If you do, discard your hand and Take 1 VP for each card discarded.

Name - Ashes
Type - Action
Cost - 0
Cost - +1 Card +1 Action _________ When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Phoenix. If you do, gain two Copper.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #55 on: February 23, 2018, 03:01:57 am »
+1

Also, this version might be too similar to den of sins.
Coming to think of it, Phoenix is actually more like terminal draw as you have to spend an Action for Ashes later. So probably more similar to Tactician than Den of Sins or Lab variants in general.


Name - Phoenix
Type - Action/Night
Cost- 6
Effect- If it's your night phase, take three Coin Tokens. Otherwise, discard and exchange this for an ashes. If you do, discard your hand and Take 1 VP for each card discarded.

Name - Ashes
Type - Action
Cost - 0
Cost - +1 Card +1 Action _________ When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Phoenix. If you do, gain two Copper.
I guess you wanted to imply a choice between Coin and VP tokens with Phoenix, i.e. "... you may take 3 Coin tokens. Otherwise ...". The simple problem is that a non-terminal 6 that takes 3 Coin tokens might be good enough on its own (compare with Merchant Guild) such that the second option will rarely be taken. So choice and exchange are not the best mechanics to mix.
Furthermore I'd be very careful with non-terminal discarding for VPs. I have a similar card in my set, Efreet, but at least it is tied to having some green in your deck. Copper self-junking might of course be enough of a nerf; hard to tell.
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #56 on: February 23, 2018, 02:27:32 pm »
0

Also, this version might be too similar to den of sins.
Coming to think of it, Phoenix is actually more like terminal draw as you have to spend an Action for Ashes later. So probably more similar to Tactician than Den of Sins or Lab variants in general.


Name - Phoenix
Type - Action/Night
Cost- 6
Effect- If it's your night phase, take three Coin Tokens. Otherwise, discard and exchange this for an ashes. If you do, discard your hand and Take 1 VP for each card discarded.

Name - Ashes
Type - Action
Cost - 0
Cost - +1 Card +1 Action _________ When you discard this from play, you may exchange it for a Phoenix. If you do, gain two Copper.
I guess you wanted to imply a choice between Coin and VP tokens with Phoenix, i.e. "... you may take 3 Coin tokens. Otherwise ...". The simple problem is that a non-terminal 6 that takes 3 Coin tokens might be good enough on its own (compare with Merchant Guild) such that the second option will rarely be taken. So choice and exchange are not the best mechanics to mix.
Furthermore I'd be very careful with non-terminal discarding for VPs. I have a similar card in my set, Efreet, but at least it is tied to having some green in your deck. Copper self-junking might of course be enough of a nerf; hard to tell.

I see your Phoenix has being a more powerful "Den of sins" clone with ashes as a downside. Having to play ashes and wait another cycle to play Phoenix again seems like such a huge downside to me.

In contrast to a normal gold I don't think 3 delayed coin tokens would be that powerful for 6. But the versatile nature of coin tokens could make it extremely strong, I guess. Honestly, I think the VP gain effect on this Phoenix is bonkers which is why I called it a bad card idea.

Edit: Not sure if you noticed, to use the VP part of this Phoenix you need to play it as a Terminal action (I copied werewolf's wording).

Name- ?
Type- Night
Cost - 6
Effect- Take 3 coin tokens. This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile).

Would ^that be too strong? I don't know...
« Last Edit: February 23, 2018, 02:34:09 pm by loneXolf »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #57 on: February 24, 2018, 07:52:14 am »
0

Name- ?
Type- Night
Cost - 6
Effect- Take 3 coin tokens. This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile).

Would ^that be too strong? I don't know...
Pretty sure it is. It is like Summoning (of course this is not technically possible) something which is better than a Gold.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #58 on: February 24, 2018, 09:51:10 am »
0

Name- ?
Type- Night
Cost - 6
Effect- Take 3 coin tokens. This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile).

Would ^that be too strong? I don't know...
Pretty sure it is. It is like Summoning (of course this is not technically possible) something which is better than a Gold.

I think it'd be fine if it didn't gain to hand. The drawback over Gold is that you don't get to spend the Coin tokens straight away because you get them in night, but gaining to hand kind of negates that downside.
Logged

loneXolf

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +41
    • View Profile
    • My steam profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2018, 11:49:50 am »
0

Name- ?
Type- Night
Cost - 6
Effect- Take 3 coin tokens. This is gained to your hand (instead of your discard pile).

Would ^that be too strong? I don't know...
Pretty sure it is. It is like Summoning (of course this is not technically possible) something which is better than a Gold.

I think it'd be fine if it didn't gain to hand. The drawback over Gold is that you don't get to spend the Coin tokens straight away because you get them in night, but gaining to hand kind of negates that downside.

Yeah making the first Phoenix play much quicker than a first gold player seems nuts. But, Den of sins and ghost town sorta do the same thing, but it seems more ridiculous with coin tokens. Maybe it could work as a swamp hag (without the attack of course), but I think it a slight nerf won't fix the problem.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2018, 01:17:15 pm »
0

Raider with hand-gain but without the attack would probably be too strong as well but perhaps it'd be OK.
Coin tokens is totally crazy though.
Logged

LostPhoenix

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 146
  • Shuffle iT Username: Lost Phoenix
  • The Lurker
  • Respect: +142
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #61 on: March 01, 2018, 03:00:41 pm »
0

I can't comment much about balance, but these cards are very creative and flavourful. Nice work.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #62 on: April 01, 2018, 06:32:15 pm »
+1

Some changes and new cards:



I settled on the Cornucopia-esque version and added an extra Buy to Phoenix.





Nothing fancy, just a one-shot that distributes Blackmails. Getting a Boon seems like a natural thing for a one-shot.





I need a village for my set so here it is. Like Extortioners is another way to spread Blackmails this is another way to get Traitors into the game. It is a bit like Blessed Village and Ill-Gotten Gains.
I tried to make the village effect non-standard because $4 for a village that junks when you gain it seemed too strong. Now it is either a Necropolis or a village that can draw from the discard pile and in case the opponents play BM or don't play a Vice Town during their turns you get an auto-Village next turn via Commanding (like when it gets used with Conjuration there is only one Commanding in play).

It looks like this is a way to emulate conditional durations (that can never occur or endure for more than just 1 turn) with the vanilla States. Of course there is also similar stuff you could do, e.g. you could take Beguild, i.e. the +1 Card State, when you gain a card such that the on-gain bonus becomes something like a conditional half Exploration.
Logged

somekindoftony

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #63 on: April 02, 2018, 09:26:17 am »
0

Re: Vicetown Just wondering where Traitors are listed.  I'm not a fan of attack like effects which cant be avoided as it can just lead to a race for that effect.
On a four cost card this also is worsened by Workshop variants. Could you change gain to buy?

The other aspects of the card I really like. Choosing the card from your discard pile is different enough to drawing a card and rewards playing smarter.

I'd love it if this was a card that cost 3 debt and lost the traitor aspect. It might be weaker than average but would still be situationally stronger than village.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #64 on: April 02, 2018, 02:14:28 pm »
0

Re: Vicetown Just wondering where Traitors are listed.  I'm not a fan of attack like effects which cant be avoided as it can just lead to a race for that effect.
On a four cost card this also is worsened by Workshop variants. Could you change gain to buy?
Traitors are listed in the first post.
IGG is also on gain and alleviated by its high cost. Unlike IGG Vice Town is, as you rightly pointed out, also gainable via Workshop variants and not just by Remodel variants, Artisan and Vampire. But the junk is also not as nasty as Curses; all Traitors are cantrips with something bad on top of that (topdecking, discarding, taking Debt, negative VPs.)

Obviously I want a card with a similar power level as IGG, i.e. not a card which will always be bought. As Vice Town is quite often a Necropolis I doubt that it is too strong. Also, no pile-driving like with IGG as Traitors are non-Supply cards.
Logged

somekindoftony

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #65 on: April 02, 2018, 06:14:37 pm »
0

Tah for the link. While not as bad as curses I would rate these worse than ruins at first glance. In many kingdoms this will be the sinkhole players chase each other down IMO. Also not a fan of cards with same names and different abilities. My eyes ainst so good

Vicetown will only usually be a necropolis if players play it like a village - to draw their entire deck. It has the potential to deflect a discard attack by rescuing that crucial card or find that essential piece and all this isn't even measuring Command ( which you admittedly might lose by your next turn but also might ot).
Its very much your card but there's enough complexity t drop Traitors and make a cheaper still interesting card IMO.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #66 on: April 03, 2018, 05:30:23 am »
0

Tah for the link. While not as bad as curses I would rate these worse than ruins at first glance. In many kingdoms this will be the sinkhole players chase each other down IMO.
I fail to see how any Traitor (except for Heretic due to its negative VPs) can be worse than a Ruins. It is not like you are forced to play them and a cantrip that topdecks or discards is usually better than a dead card.
Logged

somekindoftony

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #67 on: April 03, 2018, 08:22:49 am »
0

Some either gain you a poor card when trashed or have a negative effect when gained (including in one case gaining a ruins). That seems clearly worse.
Logged

somekindoftony

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #68 on: April 03, 2018, 08:29:42 am »
0

Note that due to the different effects for cards of the same name its hard to indicate which ones I mean but a number of all the differently named cards are worse than ruins IMO. A ruins is just a lame action. They dont come with a need to put your hand on your deck when trashed or 2 debt when gained. Or a copper when trashed. Or so on.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #69 on: April 03, 2018, 04:08:33 pm »
0

True that, I forgot about the on-gain and on-trash effects. I won't make them weaker though, on average they are less severe than Curses and Ruins because all of them are cantrips.
Logged

WQB

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
  • Shuffle iT Username: WQB
  • Respect: +33
    • View Profile
    • WQB Dominion
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #70 on: April 05, 2018, 05:53:13 am »
0

Holunder9, great cards! IŽd love to play with them!  :)
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #71 on: April 08, 2018, 08:10:11 am »
0

Holunder9, great cards! IŽd love to play with them!  :)
Thanks man.

Here are some cards that play with with the Conjuration States. They are more conceptual than the other ones and more about finding out whether the basic idea works or not:





A Silver+ for $4 is always a dubious notion. I think it works here though because the price of perhaps getting an extra Buy next turn (and with an even bigger perhaps, in future turns) is to play this as a Copper.





Kind of a reverse Relic. The buying of this will start something like a war of attrition: you don't really want that lousy Silver for $5 but you have to get it lest the other player gets a free Lab every turn.





Here we have something like an on-gain Treasury but this time you don't have to pay "too much" for a Silver but pay "too little" for a mere one-shot Fugitive to stop your opponent's Treasury for $2.
On-gain creates another mini-game though, under normal circumstances (i.e. no gainers and Remodel variants) you don't want to gain the 9th card (or 8th card in a 3P game) of the pile because then another player could empty the pile and get a safe Treasury for $2. No idea whether this is fun though.





This is unrelated to the Conjuration States and, once again, about Gazbag's great freezing mechanic.
The pile only contains 5 cards with Extinction being the 6th card underneath the 5 Mammoths. Like with Philosophers you don't want your opponent to get the last Mammoth.

About the duration effect, my Nightwatch Ranger is to Fugitive what Mammoth is to Asper's Scientist. Scientist  is based on Storyteller's idea of converting coins into cards. With Storyteller you convert existing Coins whereas with Scientist you backload  the payment.
The entire idea could be totally broken, it is a card which needs quite some playtesting.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #72 on: April 25, 2018, 07:01:03 am »
0



A simple idea, related to Coin of the Realms, for callable infinite Buys. Coppers and Curses have to be excluded to prevent the emptying of two piles (which would be even more broken with Gardens or Goons).
A nice feature is that you cannot call the card in the turn you played it so in an engine where you need the extra Buys to get components you need at least 2 in your deck.
Infinite Buys sound crazy at first but the card is dead when you play it and you rarely want more than 2 or 3 Buys anyway. There is some funky stuff with Peddlers and cost reduction might also make it possible to pile drive. So one alternative to phrase the card that totally prevents easy pile driving via Coppers, Curses and cost reduction would be:
While this is in play, when  you a card that costs more than +1 Buy.
Logged

Chappy7

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 262
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chappy7
  • Respect: +342
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #73 on: April 25, 2018, 10:53:37 am »
+2

I like that second wording much better.  Otherwise highway would make it too easy to pile drive. Once you have a lead and get 2 or 3 highways in play you could pile out the cheap cards.  Actually, you don't need a lead seeing as you can pile out the estates.  Maybe you should even make it say "While this is in play, when you buy a card that costs more than $1, +1 Buy.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #74 on: April 25, 2018, 12:18:02 pm »
0

Yeah, that makes much more sense.

Logged

Thanar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 120
  • Respect: +135
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #75 on: April 26, 2018, 02:05:14 am »
+1

Thanks for making this set!

While downloading everything from the (updated) first post, I noticed that your imgur folder only contains 19 unique Traitor cards (5 Backstabbers, 5 Defectors, 5 Heretics, but just 4 Turncoats), instead of the advertised 20. Can you add the missing Turncoat?
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #76 on: April 26, 2018, 07:05:09 am »
+1

Thanks for your kind words and pointing out the missing Traitori, I fixed it.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #77 on: May 06, 2018, 03:08:03 pm »
0



This is based on an idea by Seprix.
If you give it a fixed price it could be better than Province in some Kingdoms (e.g. if there are Attacks, Durations and Night cards this is better than Province as you can always buy a Curse to make Gate worth 7VPs). The variable/extra cost is a way to make the card a bit more interesting. Now you want to gain it when you have few different types in play yet your deck should have many different types.
Not sure on the numbers yet. To make the "gain at the right moment" aspect more relevant it could e.g. be 3-2 instead of 5-1 (implying a "base" price of 5 Coin and 2 Debt; you will rarely have only Actions or only Treasures in play).
A Peddler-like wording, e.g. "This costs 1 more per different type on the cards you have in play." is an alternative but it seems needlessly complicated with trash for benefit around.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #78 on: May 08, 2018, 05:53:17 pm »
0

I am not too happy with the current version. Not so much because the debt is not elegant but because it doesn't punish multiple types harsh enough. The debt version with 3-2 could just be too easy with gainers so I am going to try a straightforward cost increase. It shouldn't run into any issues except for trashing attacks. Unless you have an Action-Duration in play Knight (at a price of 7 it is safe) and Swindler (unless there are others 7s you get another Gate) could kill this.


Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6825
  • Respect: +7668
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #79 on: May 08, 2018, 06:27:08 pm »
0

Although I really like the idea of Gate, I'm not sure how it will work given that it seems to be too literally dependent upon the Kingdom. As in; while all card's are better or worse in different Kingdoms, Gate has an easy-to-see hard cap which can vary wildly from game to game.

The max could be as little as 4 in some Kingdoms, and up to 22 in others.

While other victory cards may have some Kingdoms that make their caps easier to reach; the only example I can think of with a changing hard cap like this is Fairgrounds; and other than Black Market, it has a pretty small range of value. *Edit* Technically Vineyard and Silk Road have a kingdom-dependent cap; but only if you consider the situations of buying out the Kingdom pretty much.

For fun, a Kingdom that lets you get all 22 different types in your deck (without needing Black Market). It was actually pretty hard to figure out.




« Last Edit: May 08, 2018, 06:36:24 pm by GendoIkari »
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #80 on: May 08, 2018, 07:27:14 pm »
+1

Although I really like the idea of Gate, I'm not sure how it will work given that it seems to be too literally dependent upon the Kingdom. As in; while all card's are better or worse in different Kingdoms, Gate has an easy-to-see hard cap which can vary wildly from game to game.

The max could be as little as 4 in some Kingdoms, and up to 22 in others.

While other victory cards may have some Kingdoms that make their caps easier to reach; the only example I can think of with a changing hard cap like this is Fairgrounds; and other than Black Market, it has a pretty small range of value. *Edit* Technically Vineyard and Silk Road have a kingdom-dependent cap; but only if you consider the situations of buying out the Kingdom pretty much.

For fun, a Kingdom that lets you get all 22 different types in your deck (without needing Black Market). It was actually pretty hard to figure out.




You have Necromancer, but no way to get a Zombie into your deck!
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #81 on: May 09, 2018, 01:33:56 am »
0

Although I really like the idea of Gate, I'm not sure how it will work given that it seems to be too literally dependent upon the Kingdom. As in; while all card's are better or worse in different Kingdoms, Gate has an easy-to-see hard cap which can vary wildly from game to game.
I agree. It is fairly easy to get most types present in a Kingdom into your deck (if you have half the pile of Gates in a game without junkers it can even make sense to buy a Curse in the endgame as it is the equivalent of a Duchy) whereas other Alt-VP depends more sensitively on your deck. So even without cost scaling the card could be too bland.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6825
  • Respect: +7668
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #82 on: May 09, 2018, 07:58:21 am »
0

Although I really like the idea of Gate, I'm not sure how it will work given that it seems to be too literally dependent upon the Kingdom. As in; while all card's are better or worse in different Kingdoms, Gate has an easy-to-see hard cap which can vary wildly from game to game.

The max could be as little as 4 in some Kingdoms, and up to 22 in others.

While other victory cards may have some Kingdoms that make their caps easier to reach; the only example I can think of with a changing hard cap like this is Fairgrounds; and other than Black Market, it has a pretty small range of value. *Edit* Technically Vineyard and Silk Road have a kingdom-dependent cap; but only if you consider the situations of buying out the Kingdom pretty much.

For fun, a Kingdom that lets you get all 22 different types in your deck (without needing Black Market). It was actually pretty hard to figure out.




You have Necromancer, but no way to get a Zombie into your deck!

Dang it! It might be impossible then. Any of the very few ways to get a card from the trash don’t provide any extra types.  So 21 might be the limit.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #83 on: May 25, 2018, 03:29:48 am »
0

After some playtesting Djinn got changed as the on-gain restriction made the card too swingy.

Given the abundance of $4 villages I have a weakness for $2 villages so here is a quick, random idea:

+1 Card
+1 Action

You may discard an Action card for +1 Card and +1 Action.

or slight weaker:

You may discard an Action card for +2 Cards and +2 Actions.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #84 on: May 31, 2018, 06:33:05 pm »
0

After some playtesting Djinn got changed as the on-gain restriction made the card too swingy.

Given the abundance of $4 villages I have a weakness for $2 villages so here is a quick, random idea:

+1 Card
+1 Action

You may discard an Action card for +1 Card and +1 Action.

or slight weaker:

You may discard an Action card for +2 Cards and +2 Actions.

I too love $2 cost Villages, but man do they seem hard to get right. You want them to be worthwhile, but not overpowered at cost $2. I admire you for tackling this tricky nut.

Thoughts: In both versions you are buying a conditional village that may do nothing when played, all to save 1 coin on the buy. Since the difference between $2 and $3 isn't much, it seems to come down to +Buys. Without those on the board it might be hard to find a good time to pick these up. So my suggestion would be to go for the second version and have it add an unconditional +1 Buy. Of course this is now very similar to Hamlet.

I always thought it would be cool to have a card that has the following: "In games using this, you may overpay for Estates (or maybe Duchies?). For each 1 Coin you overpay, gain a <card>." Maybe this is that card!? :I
« Last Edit: May 31, 2018, 06:35:58 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #85 on: June 01, 2018, 09:20:10 am »
0

Without those on the board it might be hard to find a good time to pick these up. So my suggestion would be to go for the second version and have it add an unconditional +1 Buy. Of course this is now very similar to Hamlet.
I guess it would be totally OK to have this with an extra Buy and a cost of $3. After all it is just a basic idea for a weaker village and any kind of extra can be added to it.

About Hamlet, note that Hamlet reduces handsize whereas this village does not. So although it seems to be similar to Hamlet I don't think that it is. Hamlet is good in junking-intense games or with draw-to-X.
This village is good in any draw engine and as good as Village in a deck that draws itself (of course you should discard payload first and maintain terminal draw Actions in your hand).
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #86 on: June 08, 2018, 02:59:36 pm »
+1



Lich is inspiread by Kudasai's Old Witch but will play quite differently. It is a half-Curser, meaning that the first time you play it everybody else gets the negative VP and the second time the junk lands in their decks. In addition to that it is mainly a Copper trasher (you can put Curses on the mat to delay the inevitable or put a Silver there just like you would trash a Silver to make Forager better) and provides some scalable payload.

I am not sure about whether the card is good enough and shouldn't rather be buffed into a Night card or whether the whole mixture sucks, meaning that the half-cursing should be tacked onto something else.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2018, 03:20:16 pm by Holunder9 »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6825
  • Respect: +7668
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #87 on: June 08, 2018, 03:09:43 pm »
0



Lich is inspiread by Kudasai's Old Witch but will play quite differently. It is a half-Curser, meaning that the first time you play it everybody else gets the negative VP and the second time the junk lands in their decks. In addition to that it is mainly a Copper junker (you can put Curses on the mat to delay the inevitable or put a Silver there just like you would trash a Silver to make Forager better) and provides some scalable payload.

I am not sure about whether the card is good enough and shouldn't rather be buffed into a Night card or whether the whole mixture sucks, meaning that the half-cursing should be tacked onto something else.

Did you mean Copper trasher instead of Copper junker?

You should probably update "coin tokens" to the coffers wording.

The half curser idea is cool. No idea how strong the rest is; limiting it to non-victory is a big nerf.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #88 on: June 08, 2018, 03:19:14 pm »
0

Did you mean Copper trasher instead of Copper junker?

You should probably update "coin tokens" to the coffers wording.

The half curser idea is cool. No idea how strong the rest is; limiting it to non-victory is a big nerf.
- Good catch, of course it should read Copper trasher.
- I don't like the Coffers thingy and don't have a new Guilds copy anyway so I stick with the old Coin tokens wording.
- If the card could set aside Victory cards it would be far too good (even taking into account that then you'd then have to get rid of the overpowered Coin token thing).
Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 307
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +557
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #89 on: June 08, 2018, 06:10:32 pm »
0

Hmmmm... This seems like it will be very weak usually.

The cursing is slow, obviously. But the benefit it gives you will also typically just be a much worse Miser. Getting some stuff for the Liches to mat seems like a serious waste of resources, so mostly you'll just be trashing Coppers one at a time.

It will get much better with Shelters of course. And it's probably bonkers with Ruins.

One thing I don't like on first glance is how, especially if there's no trashing, it seems likely to turn into a tug-of-war with the Curses bouncing on and off your Tavern mat. That seems not particularly fun.
Logged

Jack Rudd

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1081
  • Shuffle iT Username: Jack Rudd
  • Respect: +1014
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #90 on: June 08, 2018, 06:45:56 pm »
0

Lich has synergy with Reserve cards. How much this is worth, I do not know.
Logged
Centuries later, archaeologists discover the remains of your ancient civilization.

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

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

'ISOTROPIC WILL RETURN!'

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #91 on: June 08, 2018, 07:59:25 pm »
0

Lich - The concept is really cool and exciting! In a glass box, the card alone seems to offer a lot of diverse play. I really like how the Curse cycling on your Tavern mat effects the Coin output on play. Throw in Reserve cards and this should make for interesting and fun choices. Hard to tell if the price and power level are correct as this is a tough one the theorize. If adjustments are needed, you have a lot to work with:
-The non-Victory clause could be dropped.
-You could remove the bottom half choice and get both the ability to place a card and get the Coin tokens. If you went this route, you could make the choice be to Curse or to Place/Take Coins. In this version you want to win the Curse split, but you also don't want to give your opponent an extra Coin token early.

Either way I think the core mechanics are very sound and this seems playtestable. I don't play so much in real life, but the next time I do I'll try and squeeze this one into a game. Also, thanks for the shout-out!



 
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6854
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #92 on: June 08, 2018, 10:49:29 pm »
+2

I am not too happy with the current version. Not so much because the debt is not elegant but because it doesn't punish multiple types harsh enough. The debt version with 3-2 could just be too easy with gainers so I am going to try a straightforward cost increase. It shouldn't run into any issues except for trashing attacks. Unless you have an Action-Duration in play Knight (at a price of 7 it is safe) and Swindler (unless there are others 7s you get another Gate) could kill this.



In Adventures, we tested a Treasure that was worth $1 per different type on cards you had in play. It varied too wildly in value, so it turned into a card that cared about having specific types in play, and then finally vastly simplified into Relic.

My suggested fix to the original concept was to also vary the cost, much like Gate; $1 per different type on cards in the Supply. Donald X. never tried it, but in theory it seems like it should work pretty well. I also slapped +1 Buy on it so that it was worth getting over Silver in games with just Action, Victory, Treasure, and Curse in the Supply.

Curio: Treasure, $?
+1 Buy
When you play this, it's worth $1 per type on cards you have in play.
--------------------------
This costs $1 per type on cards in the Supply.

So if you had, say, Caravan (Action-Duration) and Militia (Action-Attack) in the Supply, Curio would start out costing $6 and you could get it up to being worth +$4. The cost would go down to $5 if the Caravans ran out, though. Just as an example.

Anyway, it seemed like it might be fun to try in a game, though I don't know if would actually have lasting appeal. Courtier has already used this concept a bit, and in an arguably more interesting way.

Sorry that this post didn't have anything to do with Gate. It just reminded me of this story.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #93 on: June 10, 2018, 04:23:40 am »
0

Lich - The concept is really cool and exciting! In a glass box, the card alone seems to offer a lot of diverse play. I really like how the Curse cycling on your Tavern mat effects the Coin output on play. Throw in Reserve cards and this should make for interesting and fun choices. Hard to tell if the price and power level are correct as this is a tough one the theorize. If adjustments are needed, you have a lot to work with:
-The non-Victory clause could be dropped.
-You could remove the bottom half choice and get both the ability to place a card and get the Coin tokens. If you went this route, you could make the choice be to Curse or to Place/Take Coins. In this version you want to win the Curse split, but you also don't want to give your opponent an extra Coin token early.

Either way I think the core mechanics are very sound and this seems playtestable. I don't play so much in real life, but the next time I do I'll try and squeeze this one into a game. Also, thanks for the shout-out!
I think that is a cool idea as it makes the card attractive in the presence of other Cursers. My version is unlikely to be bought if Mountebank is around but your version would then just be used like e.g. Forager, trashing and some payload.

Due to the Coin tokens, and for thematic reasons, I think though that a natural buff would to make this into a Night card.

I also fear that trashing and yielding Coin tokens could be too good.
In a normal game, after the first play of Lich you will have between 1 and 2 cards on your Tavern mat but as has been pointed out, if there are Shelters, Heirlooms, Ruins, Reserve cards or if you later set aside a Silver, Lich can provide more. As I guess that a vanilla card that provides 3 Coin tokens would be roughly a $5 I fear that Lich could be situationally too good.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #94 on: June 10, 2018, 01:26:31 pm »
0

I also fear that trashing and yielding Coin tokens could be too good.
In a normal game, after the first play of Lich you will have between 1 and 2 cards on your Tavern mat but as has been pointed out, if there are Shelters, Heirlooms, Ruins, Reserve cards or if you later set aside a Silver, Lich can provide more. As I guess that a vanilla card that provides 3 Coin tokens would be roughly a $5 I fear that Lich could be situationally too good.

I agree with what Gazbag once said, "Dominion is a situational game", or something to that effect. I don't think these situations will come up often and maybe don't merit planning for, but if you wanna reign in the max power level of Lich you have options:
(1) Cap the amount of Coin tokens Lich can produce. Not very exciting though.
(2) Only count cards on your Tavern mat with one type. This removes Shelters, Ruins, Heirlooms, and Reserve cards in one fell swoop. This should play more or less the same, but if a player really wants to churn out Coin tokens they need to start removing more valuable cards like Silver and Action cards.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2018, 02:09:31 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #95 on: June 21, 2018, 04:40:44 pm »
0

OK, here is a quick, wonky idea for an $5 or $6 Action:

Put your hand on top of your deck. Trash this. If you did, gain a Province.

It is like Tactician as it wants virtual Coins, it is like Distant Lands as you do not want to get it too late in the game and it is a Haunted Woods attack against yourself.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #96 on: June 22, 2018, 09:16:46 pm »
0

OK, here is a quick, wonky idea for an $5 or $6 Action:

Put your hand on top of your deck. Trash this. If you did, gain a Province.

It is like Tactician as it wants virtual Coins, it is like Distant Lands as you do not want to get it too late in the game and it is a Haunted Woods attack against yourself.

Interesting! Cards that lower the Province gaining threshold are always cool. I'm also a fan of top decking cards to setup the next hand. Being restricted to only Province gaining is a bummer though. It seems you'd have to go through a lot of hoops to make this work and then you're only able to gain a single Province per turn. I'd prefer something with more strategic wiggle room. Something that didn't top-deck my whole hand and could gain other non-Province cards.

Not sure if you were looking for feedback or suggestions, but I came up with this:



It can do the same thing as your version, but adds some flexibility in play. If this proved too strong, you could make it check the top-decked cards for different card types, names, or something else completely.
« Last Edit: June 22, 2018, 09:20:41 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Gazbag

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 444
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +676
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #97 on: June 23, 2018, 12:06:15 am »
0

OK, here is a quick, wonky idea for an $5 or $6 Action:

Put your hand on top of your deck. Trash this. If you did, gain a Province.

It is like Tactician as it wants virtual Coins, it is like Distant Lands as you do not want to get it too late in the game and it is a Haunted Woods attack against yourself.

Interesting! Cards that lower the Province gaining threshold are always cool. I'm also a fan of top decking cards to setup the next hand. Being restricted to only Province gaining is a bummer though. It seems you'd have to go through a lot of hoops to make this work and then you're only able to gain a single Province per turn. I'd prefer something with more strategic wiggle room. Something that didn't top-deck my whole hand and could gain other non-Province cards.

Not sure if you were looking for feedback or suggestions, but I came up with this:



It can do the same thing as your version, but adds some flexibility in play. If this proved too strong, you could make it check the top-decked cards for different card types, names, or something else completely.

I think the problem with this is that it costs $6, so because it's a one-shot you kind of need to gain a Province anyway to really get anywhere with it?
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #98 on: June 23, 2018, 01:10:42 am »
0

Quote from: Gazbag
I think the problem with this is that it costs $6, so because it's a one-shot you kind of need to gain a Province anyway to really get anywhere with it?

Yeah, the core functionality of gaining Provinces is still the same. This is just nice in the off chance there are other $7 plus cards to be gained.

I also think the top decking for an expensive one-shot like this should be more of a reward and not a punishment. In the absence of trashers, top decking your whole hand would be very brutal.

This might be a bit too strong, but the option to top deck the gained card would also be neat. Would go a long way to justify a $5-6 Coin one-shot.

« Last Edit: June 23, 2018, 01:16:27 am by Kudasai »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #99 on: June 23, 2018, 04:52:45 am »
0

You should call this something with "lands" in the name, because it reminds me of Farmlands and Distand Lands. :P You pay 6 for a Province later, and you need to play it to get the points.

Personally I think it could just say "Trash this to gain a card costing up to 8". Anything else would just plainly downgrade the card, although of course putting cards onto your deck can be useful sometimes(!) and it can't gain Colonies that way. But it's much better in any other case.

Edit: Although my suggestion makes for a veeeery bland card. My point was mostly, it doesn't need to be as weak.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #100 on: June 23, 2018, 01:28:34 pm »
0

OK, here is a quick, wonky idea for an $5 or $6 Action:

Put your hand on top of your deck. Trash this. If you did, gain a Province.

It is like Tactician as it wants virtual Coins, it is like Distant Lands as you do not want to get it too late in the game and it is a Haunted Woods attack against yourself.

Interesting! Cards that lower the Province gaining threshold are always cool. I'm also a fan of top decking cards to setup the next hand. Being restricted to only Province gaining is a bummer though. It seems you'd have to go through a lot of hoops to make this work and then you're only able to gain a single Province per turn. I'd prefer something with more strategic wiggle room. Something that didn't top-deck my whole hand and could gain other non-Province cards.

Not sure if you were looking for feedback or suggestions, but I came up with this:



It can do the same thing as your version, but adds some flexibility in play. If this proved too strong, you could make it check the top-decked cards for different card types, names, or something else completely.
So this is very good if there is Expand, Forge, Prince or Platinum/Colony in the game. Otherwise, when you use it to gain a Province, you have to topdeck 4 cards. I don't think that this is necessarily better than my version as there are plenty of Kingdoms with Action cards as main Coin source.

In general a card that can directly gain a Province should be a bit weak as it would otherwise dominate too many games. I agree though that topdecking your entire hand is pretty harsh so perhaps your suggestion to topdeck the gained card would suffice. It still keeps the flavour of a Rabble-style self-attack (Relic is so good because it is basically an anti-Lab for the opponents) while not being too harsh. It could also hand-gain the Province and then make you reveal your hand and topdeck all Victory cards (unlike the original version which yearns for virtual coins this version would be bad in a drawing engine).

Trash this. If you did, gain a Province to your hand. Reveal your hand. Put all Victory cards onto your deck.

Another version to buff it would be to include gaining 2 Duchies as a second option. This might be broken in Duke games but otherwise it would probably make the endgame more interesting.

Trash this. If you did, gain a Province or 2 Duchies onto your deck.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2018, 01:29:43 pm by Holunder9 »
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #101 on: June 23, 2018, 04:07:35 pm »
0

Another version to buff it would be to include gaining 2 Duchies as a second option. This might be broken in Duke games but otherwise it would probably make the endgame more interesting.

Trash this. If you did, gain a Province or 2 Duchies onto your deck.

I do like the option to gain 2 Duchies. This doesn't do anything Stonemason+Gold can't accomplish, so I don't think it would be an issue in Duke games. You could even take it further in this direction and do something like: "Gain (2-3) Victory cards with a total cost in coin of up to ($10-$14) to your deck." This would open the door to alt-Victory strategies.

You should call this something with "lands" in the name, because it reminds me of Farmlands and Distand Lands. :P You pay 6 for a Province later, and you need to play it to get the points.

Badlands seems very appropriate given the self-inflicted attack! Riverland might also work.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2018, 04:08:48 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #102 on: June 24, 2018, 05:48:34 am »
0

Another version to buff it would be to include gaining 2 Duchies as a second option. This might be broken in Duke games but otherwise it would probably make the endgame more interesting.

Trash this. If you did, gain a Province or 2 Duchies onto your deck.

I do like the option to gain 2 Duchies. This doesn't do anything Stonemason+Gold can't accomplish, so I don't think it would be an issue in Duke games. You could even take it further in this direction and do something like: "Gain (2-3) Victory cards with a total cost in coin of up to ($10-$14) to your deck." This would open the door to alt-Victory strategies.
Yeah, due to the topdecking it is probably not all that brilliant even in Duke games. The cost thing is good idea, with a total cost of $10 you could e.g. gain Duchy+Duchy, Province+Estate, Silk Road + Silk Road + Estates and so on. It also makes Province gaining weaker as you normally don't want the Estate.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #103 on: June 24, 2018, 06:15:35 am »
0

I'm not convinced it needs to hurt you as much, but I agree that doing something extre can make it more interesing and Badlands sounds like a cute name.

If the max total amount you could gain was 12, you could even do things like Province/Gardens, Nobles/Harem, Farmlands/Fairgounds... Pay 6 once, get 6 twice actually is not all that strong, but it would add immense flexibility in alt VP games. In the end, all it does for those is still keeping two VP cards "packed" into a single stop card, but with delay and everything.

On the other hand, 12 enables you to gain Colonies, especially if the wording isn't careful about you having to gain a first card that still leaves a second one to gain. Interestingly, this doesn't come up with a total cost of 10 as quickly, but it does. For instance by choosing a Colony after cost reduction, or when Duchies and Estates are out.

So your wording would have to do a "choose two Victory cards in the supply" first. This however still has issues. For example, can I choose the same card twice? If I can choose e.g. Duchy twice and there's only one in the supply, do I gain no second card? I already chose. This wording's going to be tricky. I actually had a lot of that trouble before when working on Assemble...

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #104 on: June 24, 2018, 07:54:33 am »
0

I don't know, being able to gain 3 Gardens, 3 Silk Roads or 2 Distant Lands and an Estate for a mere $6 seems a bit strong. Then again I might be seriously underestimating the Rabble self-attack. Plus of course the Colony issue.

No idea about how to word it well but the intuitive way this should work is: choose a Victory card with cost w, then you are forced to gain another Victory card with cost x while w+x is smaller than z, then you are forced to gain another Victory card with cost y while w+x+y is smaller than z and so on (with z being, in the examples, 10 or 12).
This rule would enable you to get a Colony, afterwards you are forced to gain a Victory card that costs $1 but none is available so you are done gaining green.

The other rule you seem to have in mind is that you simultaneously have to choose all cards whose total sum of cost equals precisely z. But as you pointed out this simultaneous thing runs into issues if a pile runs out. Or differently phrased, as you do gain cards sequently in Dominion anything about simultaneous choosing/gaining naturally runs into rule issues.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #105 on: June 24, 2018, 12:28:55 pm »
0

I'm totally assuming no self-attack. However, I also assume a fixed number of two cards.

The simple point is, for 6 you can get Altar, which gains Distant Lands without being a one-shot, and even trashes while doing so. If you can buy a Distant Lands for 5, is it really overpowered to spend an additional shuffle and an Action on getting a second one?

I think you gravely underestimate the opportunity cost of a 6-cost one-shot.

Holunder9

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 284
  • Respect: +115
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #106 on: June 24, 2018, 05:08:41 pm »
0

The only difference between buying a Province and somehow gaining the one-shot is is that you have to draw into the one-shot and spend an Action. So you need a bit more terminal space and you cannot gain the one-shot too late (which is mitigated by allowing to gain other green besides Provinces).
I think Farmlands is a more apt comparison. When you play well with it you trash a Gold and then are able to constantly gain Provinces for $6 instead of $8. So there is some initial investment (ignoring casting where you buy the first Farmlands to Remodel an Estate into a $4 and don't have to get rid of a Gold) to get the whole thing running and sometimes you don't draw into Farmlands.

So with Farmlands there is a cost and that's why I am pretty sure that there has to be something like gaining the green on-top. Otherwise the one-shot would be too bland, simple, automatic and strong.

Action
Cost - 5
Trash this. If you did, gain Victory cards with a total cost in of up to 10 onto your deck (if possible you have to continue gaining further Victory cards until you reached the cost limit).

10 is normally Duchy/Duchy or Province/Estate. I don't think that 12 would be good, it is broken in a Colony game, very good with Alt-VP (mostly costing 4 or 6) and weak without alt-VP (Duchy/Duchy/Estate or Province/Estate/Estate).
Logged

Kudasai

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #107 on: June 24, 2018, 06:18:02 pm »
0

I can't weigh in much on the power level of either Holunder9 or ASper's versions (you're both far better at that kind of analysis), but I can offer a wording suggestion:



If Colony gaining was the only reason for keeping the total cost below $10 Coin, this would fix that issue and allow for more total coin.

If this is to be sort of a self, topdecking punishment card, I like the idea of letting the player choose up to 3 Victory cards to gain. It makes them weigh the maximum potential of the one-shot to how bad they want their next hand to be. They could gain just the one Province and probably have an intact next hand, but the card potential isn't reached.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4350
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #108 on: June 24, 2018, 06:21:44 pm »
0

12 is broken only if you do a wording that lets you get around choosing two cards that are 12 total. A wording that doesn't would be "Choose two Victory cards in the supply with a total cost of up to 12, to gain them.". But I already remarked on that.

And I really don't think you should consider the ability to do a Remodel effect on gain as "an investment". It's the opposite. You can remodel a Gold if you really wish so, but, uh, that's one of many options, and even then you still just traded one 6 for another and bought a Province for 6.
Edit: To be entirely correct, in your example, of course you could have played the Gold and bought the Province outright. But yeah, Farmlands allowed you to do something else instead.
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 5 [All]
 

Page created in 0.369 seconds with 20 queries.