Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9  All

Author Topic: Holunder's cards  (Read 41815 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #150 on: October 16, 2018, 04:46:44 pm »
0

Yeah, it is broken with Possession. Gotta live with that.

You could add: "If the previous turn wasn't yours, do this any number of times: ..." It's a lot of text to add for just one card interaction, but whole paragraphs have been written in rulebooks to address Possession issues. In that context, maybe this isn't so bad?

I think I'll be adding this to Bivouac to be on the safe side.

That text doesn't prevent it. The infinite move is being done on your regular turn, before the Possession turn.
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 #151 on: October 16, 2018, 05:10:55 pm »
0

It's simply "in games using this, the first player to play a Possession immediately wins".
Nah, as Asper pointed out you also need Travelling Fair. Or 7 Market Squares in the opponents deck which he or she is unlikely to provide. So it is a 3 card combo, like the good old KC-Masquerade(1st)-Goons, with infinitesimal odds of occuring.


I think I'll be adding this to Bivouac to be on the safe side.
Without having thought much about it, I doubt that it is even feasible to fix Possession interactions with token-gaining cards with infinite loops. But even if it possible, you'll have an easier time to live with a card being broken with Possession than to fix interactions with a dubious, way-too-high-complexity card whose token interactions rules have been changed several times. In my opinion this is  more of a problem of Possession than of Bivouac or Black Cat just like Champion+Road is more of a problem of Champion than of Road.

Arguably all three concepts are problematic, otherwise such mess wouldn't arise: playing with the hand and tokens of somebody else, playing a card and getting it back to hand, doing something good for you and them as often as you want to.

Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9701
  • Respect: +10741
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #152 on: October 16, 2018, 05:24:50 pm »
0

It's simply "in games using this, the first player to play a Possession immediately wins".
Nah, as Asper pointed out you also need Travelling Fair. Or 7 Market Squares in the opponents deck which he or she is unlikely to provide. So it is a 3 card combo, like the good old KC-Masquerade(1st)-Goons, with infinitesimal odds of occuring.

Ok true... but at least to me, "in games using this, when you play a Possession, gain infinite money for your next turn, and infinite actions for the rest of the game" still sounds like too big a change on Possession. And even with KC-Masq-Goons (or any discard attack); it was something you had to build towards. Basically like an alternate win condition that you would race towards... not really different from "first to get a Golden deck going". This simply makes Possession suddenly a very different card than either Possession or Black Cat would expect to be.
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 #153 on: October 16, 2018, 05:41:41 pm »
+1

This simply makes Possession suddenly a very different card than either Possession or Black Cat would expect to be.
You are right, while the two card dombo doesn't instantaneously win the game is also totally broken. But I see no way to fix this except via not doing a card with an infinite loop that gains tokens.

One could do that, Black Cat could e.g. be a simpler Monastery variant:



But I am no fan of this, it is too vanilla for my taste. So I rather play around with the slightly more complex Black Cat but keep my fingers off the real culprit, the hypercomplex Possession (I don't think that I ever explained that card right in the few games I played with it during all those rule changes). I also dare to claim that if a "Renaissance looks too simple" guys likes me considers a Dominion card to be too complex there must be something to it.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #154 on: October 16, 2018, 08:30:33 pm »
0

Yeah, it is broken with Possession. Gotta live with that.

You could add: "If the previous turn wasn't yours, do this any number of times: ..." It's a lot of text to add for just one card interaction, but whole paragraphs have been written in rulebooks to address Possession issues. In that context, maybe this isn't so bad?

I think I'll be adding this to Bivouac to be on the safe side.

That text doesn't prevent it. The infinite move is being done on your regular turn, before the Possession turn.

True! Sorry, I rushed that post without stopping to even look at Possession. This wording should work:

"If this is not an extra turn, you may play this any number of times: ..."
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #155 on: October 17, 2018, 03:46:52 am »
0

Yeah, it is broken with Possession. Gotta live with that.

You could add: "If the previous turn wasn't yours, do this any number of times: ..." It's a lot of text to add for just one card interaction, but whole paragraphs have been written in rulebooks to address Possession issues. In that context, maybe this isn't so bad?

I think I'll be adding this to Bivouac to be on the safe side.

That text doesn't prevent it. The infinite move is being done on your regular turn, before the Possession turn.

True! Sorry, I rushed that post without stopping to even look at Possession. This wording should work:

"If this is not an extra turn, you may play this any number of times: ..."
Yeah, this works for Bivouac as Bivouac is the inverse of Black Cat, i.e. it is only abusive if you play it while possessing somebody whereas Black Cat does the nasty stuff on the turn before the Possession turn. At least if I got the rules about Possession and VP tokens right.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #156 on: October 17, 2018, 06:52:22 pm »
0

Yeah, it is broken with Possession. Gotta live with that.

You could add: "If the previous turn wasn't yours, do this any number of times: ..." It's a lot of text to add for just one card interaction, but whole paragraphs have been written in rulebooks to address Possession issues. In that context, maybe this isn't so bad?

I think I'll be adding this to Bivouac to be on the safe side.

That text doesn't prevent it. The infinite move is being done on your regular turn, before the Possession turn.

True! Sorry, I rushed that post without stopping to even look at Possession. This wording should work:

"If this is not an extra turn, you may play this any number of times: ..."
Yeah, this works for Bivouac as Bivouac is the inverse of Black Cat, i.e. it is only abusive if you play it while possessing somebody whereas Black Cat does the nasty stuff on the turn before the Possession turn. At least if I got the rules about Possession and VP tokens right.

Okay, now I'm seeing the issue with Black Cat. Sorry it took me so long.

Well, getting all three (Black Cat, Possession, and Travelling Fair) seems unlikely, and it would be easy enough to suggest that players not use this combination, but if you wanted Black Cat to be full-proof you could try this wording:

"If you don't have Possession in play, do this any number of times: ..."

A bit awkward and confusing to name a card that may never show up with Black Cat, but you could also change it to:

"If you don't have Action cards in play, do this any number of times: ..."

This last one considerably weakens Black Cat, so it would be fair to buff it in other areas, but this is likely getting too far away from your original design.
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #157 on: October 17, 2018, 07:01:32 pm »
+1

Simple solution:
In games using this and Possession, burn all copies of Possession.


Edit: In case the word All is ambiguous, I mean ALL.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2018, 07:02:48 pm by Fly-Eagles-Fly »
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #158 on: October 17, 2018, 07:05:17 pm »
0

Simple solution:
In games using this and Possession, burn all copies of Possession.


Edit: In case the word All is ambiguous, I mean ALL.

Even copies a friend down the street might have? Best to be safe I think.
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #159 on: October 17, 2018, 07:28:31 pm »
+1

Simple solution:
In games using this and Possession, burn all copies of Possession.


Edit: In case the word All is ambiguous, I mean ALL.

Even copies a friend down the street might have? Best to be safe I think.
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #160 on: October 17, 2018, 07:33:04 pm »
0

Just reread Owl, and I think it's wording needs updated. First of all, +1 Coffers. And do you take a coin token when you don't receive a hex, or when you don't gain an owl?
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #161 on: October 18, 2018, 03:35:37 am »
0

Well, getting all three (Black Cat, Possession, and Travelling Fair) seems unlikely, and it would be easy enough to suggest that players not use this combination, but if you wanted Black Cat to be full-proof you could try this wording:

"If you don't have Possession in play, do this any number of times: ..."
Thanks, this works although it feels kind of weird to exclude one card (with which I don't play anyway).


And do you take a coin token when you don't receive a hex, or when you don't gain an owl?
Technically, when you don't receive a Hex. You can opt to receive a Hex if the Owls pile is empty.
So realistically, when you do neither.
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #162 on: October 18, 2018, 07:32:24 am »
0

Also, you have a bunch of cards that give a coin token or an action token. I assume that action tokens=Villagers? You could update your cards with coffers and villagers. And Spectre says resolves the next Hex, instead ofrReceives the next hex.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #163 on: October 20, 2018, 10:17:05 am »
0

Also, you have a bunch of cards that give a coin token or an action token. I assume that action tokens=Villagers? You could update your cards with coffers and villagers. And Spectre says resolves the next Hex, instead ofrReceives the next hex.
Yeah, some folks, especially Aquila, played around with Action tokens before they became official. This is why I am not that excited by Renaissance, Coin tokens and Action tokens is something I am already familiar with. I also did some Lost in the Woods style States here which are equivalent to Artifacts.


Here are some nasty sideways cards that slow down play:



Renaissance has an on-shuffle trigger so this is a natural idea that punishes engine play.





Kinda like Tax but you get Ruins instead of Debt and if you cannot or do not want to get rid of them because your Scrying Pools love them so much or because they belong into a Museum you even get some points, set collection style.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2018, 01:15:03 am by Holunder9 »
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
  • Respect: +289
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #164 on: October 21, 2018, 04:45:37 am »
+1

Also, you have a bunch of cards that give a coin token or an action token. I assume that action tokens=Villagers? You could update your cards with coffers and villagers. And Spectre says resolves the next Hex, instead ofrReceives the next hex.
Yeah, some folks, especially Aquila, played around with Action tokens before they became official. This is why I am not that excited by Renaissance, Coin tokens and Action tokens is something I am already familiar with. I also did some Lost in the Woods style States here which are equivalent to Artifacts.


Here are some nasty sideways cards that slow down play:



Renaissance has an on-shuffle trigger so this is a natural idea that punishes engine play.





Kinda like Tax but you get Ruins instead of Debt and if you cannot or do not want to get rid of them because your Scrying Pools love them so much or because they belong into a Museum you even get some points, set collection style.

Oh these are nasty indeed! It's nice to have stuff like this around for those who really like a good slog.

Barbarism - Good to see something that hurts engine play more than big money yet doesn't exactly reduce the game to just playing big money itself.

Archaeologist - This is a very cool concept and you've gotten all the nuances of this card onto one very small mockup. I do fear being forced to take the Ruins along with the associated Kingdom card might be too harsh. Have you considered making it a choice? Like, "When a player gains a card with a Ruins on top of it, they may gain it."? This would allow players to build their decks a bit before taking the leap into Ruins fest. Otherwise, I think this becomes a slog too fast.

Also, is the Ruins pile also included in games using Archaeologist? Might be nice to give players who might have fallen behind on certain Ruins to have a chance to catch backup.

You reference both Kingdom Piles and Supply piles, when it should be one or the other. Currently you put Ruins on all Supply piles (Treasures and Victory cards included), but you only take Ruins from Kingdom Card Piles.

Very interesting cards though. Have you gotten any games in with them?
« Last Edit: October 21, 2018, 04:52:46 am by Kudasai »
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #165 on: October 22, 2018, 01:23:42 am »
0

Thanks for the catch, I fixed it. Barbarism is untested and I only played one 3P game with Archaeologist and no trashing. It was long but not horrible enough to make me want to reduce the number of Ruins somehow (it might be too slow in a 2P game with no trashing though) and the player who won actually won due to the Ruins.
I did not have the Ruins pile in the Supply during this game (and I wouldn't know how to scale it well given that 17-21 Ruins are already used) but it is a neat idea to make the set collection thing stronger.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #166 on: October 22, 2018, 01:32:16 pm »
0




First of all, this is in no way intended to be a substitute for Fly-Eagles-Fly's great Winery/Wine design! I first wanted to do something with water, wheat and bread but we already have Mill and Baker.

Winery and Grapes are part of a split pile with Winery above and Grapes below. Both cards are expensive for their vanilla effects but sometimes you might just use them as ordinary engine pieces.
There is a Cornucopia-like theme of variety and while the Coffers and Debt of Grapes are usually a liability you can make an asset out of them. Something like 5 Coffers and 6 Debt can be situationally good.
Wine is a recycling of the main idea of Phoenix (Phoenix was superbad because it is so superslow, taking at least 3 turns to be played again).

Now what about those Night Grapes and Ice Wine? Obviously the source of the idea is thematically, you harvest frozen grapes at night to make sweet wine out of them but your workers are not happy about nearly freezing to death.
My first idea was to make Grapes an Action-Night but that's too wordy to be stuck on one card. So perhaps simply make a double pile of Grapes underneath the Winery, i.e. once the Wineries are gone you can always choose to gain either kind of Grapes? Or maintain the flexibility and implement it as an Action-Night via printing the Action part on one side and the Night part on the other which comes with the problem of having the card being visible in and above all on your deck? I have no idea how to physically implement it well.

I am not totally sure about the downside of the Night Grapes but it does nothing constructive on play and having one or more villages out of your deck for several turns should hurt some.
Ice Wine is controversial as it is something that DXV tested for Intrigue but didn't work: 3 vs 5 Provinces leads to a VP spread of 12 whereas 3 vs 5 Ice Wines leads to a VP spread of 16. Perhaps it can work as on a non-Supply card that is difficult to get?
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #167 on: October 25, 2018, 03:09:30 pm »
0

I think Ice Wine should work as a non-supply card, especially if the Night version of Grapes is the card that gives it to you, since you don't really want to play that Grapes. As far as the two types of Grapes, you could do it that when you use Winery, you use either grapes, one or the other. If you used randomizer cards, you would have one for Winery/Grapes One, and one for Winery/Grapes Two. Or, you could use this weird template on Violet CLM's card generator:

https://shemitz.net/static/dominion3/?title=Grapes&title2=Grapes&description=Description%20for%20Action%20Grapes&description2=Description%20for%20Night%20Grapes&type=Action&credit=&price=%244&preview=&type2=Night&picture=&color0=0&color1=11&size=2
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #168 on: October 26, 2018, 12:35:54 pm »
0

It's Hobbit time!



The little ones love their Shire so some Victory card interaction it is. Could be that discarding Actions and Treasures is too harsh but Pipe is pretty good (I used something similar on Efreet). Then again Hobbit is just a buffed Scout that might be weaker than Seer.

EDIT: Pipe trigger is now trashing something good from your hand or discard. Could be situationally even beneficial when you want to get rid of a Silver. The wording is too compact though for space reasons. This would be better as it doesn't allow you to just look at your discard without trashing anything:
You may look through your discard pile. If you did, trash a card costing 3 or more from it or your hand to take the Pipe.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2018, 04:19:23 am by Holunder9 »
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #169 on: October 26, 2018, 12:40:31 pm »
0

Then again Hobbit is just a buffed Scout that might be weaker than Seer.
You have just made it so much harder to take this card seriously. Anyway:
I like this, but I think it should be made a bit stronger somehow. I mean, if you discard all your Actions you have basically nullified the +1 Action.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #170 on: October 26, 2018, 12:56:46 pm »
0

Then again Hobbit is just a buffed Scout that might be weaker than Seer.
You have just made it so much harder to take this card seriously. Anyway:
I like this, but I think it should be made a bit stronger somehow. I mean, if you discard all your Actions you have basically nullified the +1 Action.
The five ways to change it I have in mind are:

1) Hobbit at cost $4 with +1 Action and +1 Coin
Asper suggested this here and it is best Scout buff I know. I opted not to do the Peddler thing because I think that Hobbit in this context wants to draw.

2) Discard all your Actions.
Still harsh.

3) Discard all your Treasures.
Perhaps not harsh enough.

4) Choose to discard either or.
Perhaps not harsh enough.

5) Hobbit as it is at cost $4.
Perhaps too good.
Logged

Fly-Eagles-Fly

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 422
  • Respect: +190
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #171 on: October 26, 2018, 01:02:27 pm »
0

Then again Hobbit is just a buffed Scout that might be weaker than Seer.
You have just made it so much harder to take this card seriously. Anyway:
I like this, but I think it should be made a bit stronger somehow. I mean, if you discard all your Actions you have basically nullified the +1 Action.
The five ways to change it I have in mind are:

1) Hobbit at cost $4 with +1 Action and +1 Coin
Asper suggested this here and it is best Scout buff I know. I opted not to do the Peddler thing because I think that Hobbit in this context wants to draw.

2) Discard all your Actions.
Still harsh.

3) Discard all your Treasures.
Perhaps not harsh enough.

4) Choose to discard either or.
Perhaps not harsh enough.

5) Hobbit as it is at cost $4.
Perhaps too good.
I really like the first option.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #172 on: October 26, 2018, 01:06:25 pm »
0

I really like the first option.
Note that the key differences are that the Lab version is more likely to draw Victory cards so it is better with Pipe whereas the Peddler version is better for general play (if you discard everything to get the Pipe you are unlikely to be able to buy anything in this turn), independent of Pipe. I lean towards a stronger synergy between Kingdom card and Artifact.
Logged

Holunder9

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 837
  • Respect: +380
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #173 on: October 27, 2018, 04:16:27 am »
0

Where there are Hobbits, Wizards are not far:



Wizard is probably a good $4 / weak $5 so without the Artifact it would be an expensive engine piece. Like most Potion cards it has some self-synergy (play 4 Wizards, then take the Staff). If it is too weak I'll merge the card with Settlement.
Staff is pretty crazy and defense strategies are similar to Possession (green earlier). The sifting option is there in case you don't want to gamble or want to exchange your bad hand with your own cards instead of an opponent's card (if he defends e.g. via playing money and greening early)
There are tricks like calling 2 Ratcatchers and then handing the other player a hand of 3 to get a hand of 5 or doing the same via leeching off handsize attacks.

EDIT: Staff only passes up to 3 cards instead of the entire hand.
EDIT2: Got a test game in and Wizard was too weak so I merged it with Settlement aka Tokenmonger which is a slightly weakish $5 so it should be OK for this slot.
« Last Edit: October 28, 2018, 02:58:37 am by Holunder9 »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4995
  • Respect: +5345
    • View Profile
Re: Holunder's cards
« Reply #174 on: October 27, 2018, 04:59:44 am »
0

Huh, I think both of these would be more interesting if they didn't take the Artifact in such a similar way. Also, Wizard seems a bit weak for a card costing "more than" 5$. It probably could get away just giving the Villager or Coffers without discarding. Staff seems like it could pretty much destroy the purpose of a deckbuilding game, to be honest. And when are you going to have Pipe and not have at least a few good cards in hand? Psychologically it appears really bad, and at the very least, I'd never sacrifice a hand in hopes of potentially improving a later hand. If that happens, however, I think it would be game-breaking. Did you consider just masquerading a single card? It's not hyper strong, but should be fine if you buff Wizard itself at the same time.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9  All
 

Page created in 1.174 seconds with 21 queries.