Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9  All

Author Topic: Holunder's cards  (Read 41811 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • 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

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • 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

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • 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: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • 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...
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • 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: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • 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.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • 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

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • 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: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • 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.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 06:27:50 pm by Asper »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #109 on: June 26, 2018, 05:56:07 am »
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.
That's a great, unambiguous wording. The only thing I don't like is that it is inflexible about the number of Victory cards so I'd change it to: Trash this. If you do, do this up to 6 times:
The problem with this is though that you then can just gain one Province and don't have to gain the Estate.

It's really a mess to word this perfectly.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #110 on: June 26, 2018, 07:57:13 am »
0

Yeah, wording this kind of thing is a pain. I actually never found a satisfying solution to this with Assemble, now that I think about it.

Also, compare this to Distant Lands. That one costs as much as a Duchy, but gives more points and stops clogging your deck. It also has a lot in common with Feast, in that it's a self-Remodel. If you gain a Province withit, it already gains you an Estate... Yuk. It can be non-terrible for some alt-VP games without being broken, guys.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #111 on: June 26, 2018, 10:27:32 am »
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.

This doesn't work due to the lose track rule. Once you've gained both cards, you can't move the first one you gained. Also, just seems super weird to allow you to choose to gain 2 Provinces, but if you do you get nothing. There must be a wording that allows you to only choose what you want the person to be able to choose in the first place.

Finally, seems really weak. Gaining a Province and an Estate is pretty bad unless the game is almost over.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2018, 10:29:43 am 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

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #112 on: June 26, 2018, 12:00:07 pm »
0

Yeah, wording this kind of thing is a pain. I actually never found a satisfying solution to this with Assemble, now that I think about it.

Also, compare this to Distant Lands. That one costs as much as a Duchy, but gives more points and stops clogging your deck. It also has a lot in common with Feast, in that it's a self-Remodel. If you gain a Province withit, it already gains you an Estate... Yuk. It can be non-terrible for some alt-VP games without being broken, guys.
Distant Lands is so good that it can virtually never be ignored but the main difference between Distant Lands and some one-shot that directly gains Victory cards is that the former is an entirely new card.
So the one-shot should not be so good that it is too often the main or only way towards green. I see though that the green topdecking might make the card too weak.

One way to achieve what you suggested, make the card flexible in terms of being good for Alt-VP but also "ordinary" Province gaining, would be to make the cost variable, i.e. you could e.g. pay 5 to be able to gain Victory cards costing a total 8, pay 6 to be able to gain Victory cards costing a total of 10 and so on (potentially with other values). Then again this nearly impossible to implement in a non-digital form though.
The only way to physically do it which I see is via overpay. As the card cannot memorize that it became better due to overpaying you'd have to exchange the 5-8 Victory card for a 6-10 or 7-12 and afterwards put the gained 5-8 into card nirvana which seems like a total mess of an implementation.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #113 on: June 26, 2018, 03:04:57 pm »
0

I mean, feel free to not believe me, but I recommend you try it out in playtesting.

If you are worried that direct gaining of Provinces is too strong, how about centering it around engines and alt-VP instead?

Quote
Trash this to gain two cards costing up to 6.

is probably a bit too similar to Vampire (although terminal and without the Bat thing), but looks balanced just fine and will go with all sorts of strategies. It could be another starting point.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2018, 03:06:05 pm by Asper »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #114 on: June 26, 2018, 03:36:56 pm »
0

I mean, feel free to not believe me, but I recommend you try it out in playtesting.

If you are worried that direct gaining of Provinces is too strong, how about centering it around engines and alt-VP instead?

Quote
Trash this to gain two cards costing up to 6.

is probably a bit too similar to Vampire (although terminal and without the Bat thing), but looks balanced just fine and will go with all sorts of strategies. It could be another starting point.
If I ever try something like this out (so far I mentally categorize it more as crackpot idea than as decent card idea to really try out) I will definitely first test it without the topdecking.
Your idea looks sound (it is definitely simpler, more flexible and less wacky than my ideas) and different enough from Feast to be interesting. I have a hard time judging one-shots though. My first hunch is that this should cost $4 like Feast but it is probably rather a $3.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #115 on: June 26, 2018, 03:37:14 pm »
0

One way to achieve what you suggested, make the card flexible in terms of being good for Alt-VP but also "ordinary" Province gaining, would be to make the cost variable, i.e. you could e.g. pay 5 to be able to gain Victory cards costing a total 8, pay 6 to be able to gain Victory cards costing a total of 10 and so on (potentially with other values). Then again this nearly impossible to implement in a non-digital form though.
The only way to physically do it which I see is via overpay. As the card cannot memorize that it became better due to overpaying you'd have to exchange the 5-8 Victory card for a 6-10 or 7-12 and afterwards put the gained 5-8 into card nirvana which seems like a total mess of an implementation.

This sounds similar to an idea I wanted to try (shameless plug incoming!). No idea if it works, but I'm sharing merely to show that I think keeping track of overpays is possible. It's not card by card, but it can track the last overpay and apply that to all cards.




This is the best I can do to implement this format into your specifications. The values don't quite match, but I think they are close enough.




Yeah, wording this kind of thing is a pain. I actually never found a satisfying solution to this with Assemble, now that I think about it.

I think the Assemble wording looks fine, but if you wanted it to be more in-line with official wording, you could tweak it a bit to be more like Develop.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2018, 03:44:32 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #116 on: June 26, 2018, 03:45:56 pm »
0

A mat and tokens are a cool way to memorize overpay effects but the problem is that it isn't bound to the single card. This isn't a problem for your Tinkerer but for the one-shot it is unless one doesn't mind that buying a copy of the one-shot, then buying a second copy and overpaying for it makes both copies identical/better.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #117 on: June 26, 2018, 03:48:02 pm »
0

I should also add that I don't think I've been tracking the conversation properly. I may be missing the intent of the card and thus have been offering useless mockups. But hopefully you can still take away the core implementation and put that into whatever mechanics you want.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #118 on: June 26, 2018, 03:52:09 pm »
0

Definitely, as usual you are mechanically the most innovative amongst us and this is easily the best way to implement value changes / Mystic vale style card crafting in Dominion.

About Tinkerer, I like the idea but think that the values are off. You can e.g. buy Tinkerer, not overpay for it, later buy a second Tinkerer, pay 8 for it and now you have 2 direct Province gainers in your deck.
« Last Edit: June 26, 2018, 03:53:35 pm by Holunder9 »
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #119 on: June 26, 2018, 03:52:45 pm »
0

A mat and tokens are a cool way to memorize overpay effects but the problem is that it isn't bound to the single card. This isn't a problem for your Tinkerer but for the one-shot it is unless one doesn't mind that buying a copy of the one-shot, then buying a second copy and overpaying for it makes both copies identical/better.

Yeah. There's probably no good way to track individual cards, but I think the overall tracking is still a viable solution. A player may be tempted to buy a bunch at $5 then go for the overpay, but in doing so they are flooding their deck with terminal, block cards. The mechanics of Dominion itself may make buying and holding onto a bunch of these a losing strategy. I of course can't prove this without testing, but I think it's worth considering if you really wanted to go for the overpay route.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #120 on: June 26, 2018, 03:58:28 pm »
0

About Tinkerer, I like the idea but think that the values are off. You can e.g. buy Tinkerer, not overpay for it, later buy a second Tinkerer, pay 8 for it and now you have 2 direct Province gainers in your deck.

This was a concern I never got around to testing. I just got caught up and excited about the overpay-gainer conversation and wanted to share. Testing is needed! I think with the right values, both of our concepts can work.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #121 on: June 26, 2018, 05:07:32 pm »
0

About Tinkerer, I like the idea but think that the values are off. You can e.g. buy Tinkerer, not overpay for it, later buy a second Tinkerer, pay 8 for it and now you have 2 direct Province gainers in your deck.

This was a concern I never got around to testing. I just got caught up and excited about the overpay-gainer conversation and wanted to share. Testing is needed! I think with the right values, both of our concepts can work.
Definitely, as one, pardon the pun, has to tinker with several values it is a testing-intense thing. But I am pretty sure that a Province gainer for $8 is too good. Take Fortune, you are willing to pay 16 for something which often just makes you gain another Province in the turn you play it (of course with good play and in the right Kingdom you can do something more brilliant with Fortune).

On a sidenote, I just wanted to quickly remark that there are two other ways to buff a green-gaining one-shot: make it a Night card or even better, make it a Reaction that triggers on discard.
The former means that you need no terminal space anymore, so you'll always go for it unless the ending is near and fear that you don't shuffle and draw into the one-shot anymore whereas with sifters the latter doesn't even occupy a "real card space" (or however you want to call it) in your deck.

Here is a quick mock-up that uses Kudasai's wording:

Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #122 on: June 26, 2018, 06:00:54 pm »
0

So while I am doing wacky stuff, here is another crazy idea for a $5/$6 Action-Reserve:

Put this on your Tavern mat.
--------------------------
When another player would gain a non-Victory card, you may call this to gain that card instead.


It is a kind of mixture between Smugglers, Duplicate and a trashing Attack that triggers on-gain (when the opponent gains a card).
Well, it is not literally the same thing as the gained card doesn't get trashed but it is the closest comparison to existing cards that came to mind and that might help judging the card.

My first hunch is that this is either broken or unfun due to the "war of attrition" that will emerge in 2P and due to to "Cold War" / "first to move loses" issue that might emerge in multiplayer (A and B have this Reserve card on their Tavern mat, C gains a card. If A calls first then B can call and hurt C as well as A so nobody will call; having the Reserve set aside just serves as defense against the other players calling theirs.).
The multiplayer issue is fixable via restricting it, like Smugglers, to cards that the player to your right would gain.
Logged

Chappy7

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 542
  • Shuffle iT Username: Chappy7
  • Respect: +660
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #123 on: June 26, 2018, 06:12:25 pm »
0

So while I am doing wacky stuff, here is another crazy idea for a $5/$6 Action-Reserve:

Put this on your Tavern mat.
--------------------------
When another player would gain a non-Victory card, you may call this to gain that card instead.


It is a kind of mixture between Smugglers, Duplicate and a trashing Attack that triggers on-gain (when the opponent gains a card).
Well, it is not literally the same thing as the gained card doesn't get trashed but it is the closest comparison to existing cards that came to mind and that might help judging the card.

I hate to say it, but even if this worked, it sounds really un-fun.

My first hunch is that this is either broken or unfun due to the "war of attrition" that will emerge in 2P and due to to "Cold War" / "first to move loses" issue that might emerge in multiplayer (A and B have this Reserve card on their Tavern mat, C gains a card. If A calls first then B can call and hurt C as well as A so nobody will call; having the Reserve set aside just serves as defense against the other players calling theirs.).
The multiplayer issue is fixable via restricting it, like Smugglers, to cards that the player to your right would gain.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #124 on: June 27, 2018, 07:41:16 am »
0

Dead Marshes as shown above can't work. It's got all too much text on it.

Also, if you reduce the cost of cards by e.g. Bridge, you can gain up to all of them...
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 9  All
 

Page created in 0.053 seconds with 21 queries.