Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 301 302 [303] 304 305 ... 327  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contests #1 - #100  (Read 551666 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

majiponi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 640
  • Respect: +525
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7550 on: November 18, 2020, 09:50:49 am »
+1

Updated again. On second thought, I think it doesn't need the Saboteur part.

This way it's simpler, but keeps the tricky decisions of both players.




Quote

Buffoon Action Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Each other player gains a copy of it and a Copper; or
you gain a copy of it; or
you play it twice, leaving it there.


Edited to add wording suggestions from gambit05. Thanks for that!

Edited 2: Changed play option to throne.

Nice. Old exchange option destroyed my hand eternally.

Exchange my Copper to Copper (similar to discarding). 5 times! My hand is empty!
Logged

X-tra

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 248
  • Respect: +344
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7551 on: November 18, 2020, 11:25:21 am »
0

Only discarding is implied to be from hand. It needs to say from their hand.

Mmmh. Right you are. I forgot about the wording of stuff like Throne Room that specifically says that it is a card being played from your hand. S'been a while since I haven't done one of these :D . Anyway, my original card has been edited to fix that.
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +340
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7552 on: November 18, 2020, 12:07:00 pm »
0

Changed it again.

As Buffoon is terminal and doesn't give the that Jester or Mountebank gives, I think the option of junking attack, which doesn't give you a resource in this turn, can be stronger. So I changed it to curse.

It also makes harder the decision of the player to your left about which card she reveals.

Feedbacks are welcome!



Quote

Buffoon • • Action – Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a Curse.

« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 03:39:01 pm by Carline »
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1553
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +1271
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7553 on: November 18, 2020, 12:43:56 pm »
+1

Changed it again.

As Buffoon is terminal and doesn't give the that Jester or Mountebank gives, I think the option of junking attack, which doesn't give you a resource in this turn, can be stronger. So I changed it to curse.

It also makes harder the decision of the player to your left about which card she reveals.

Feedbacks are welcome!

Quote

Buffoon Action Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a Curse.

If the Curses are empty and your opponent reveals a Curse, this does absolutely nothing.

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +340
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7554 on: November 18, 2020, 02:18:07 pm »
0

Sorry LittleFish, i deleted the message to post a new version of it while you are commenting about it. The new message I was preparing is this:

If the Curses are empty and your opponent reveals a Curse, this does absolutely nothing.

Yes, thank you! I also don't like when a card does nothing.

I think the new version below fix it. It also can give Ruins if available.

In some situations, you can even choose other card than Curse, Copper or Ruins, for example with Bandit Fort or Wolf Den or if it makes you three-pile this turn.



Quote

Buffoon • • Action – Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a card from a supply pile you choose (same pile for all players).

« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 03:38:40 pm by Carline »
Logged

LittleFish

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 401
  • Respect: +174
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7555 on: November 18, 2020, 02:22:50 pm »
0

Sorry LittleFish, i deleted the message to post a new version of it while you are commenting about it. The new message I was preparing is this:

If the Curses are empty and your opponent reveals a Curse, this does absolutely nothing.

Yes, thank you! I also don't like when a card does nothing.

I think the new version below fix it. It also can give Ruins if available.

In some situations, you can even choose other card than Curse, Copper or Ruins, for example with Bandit Fort or Wolf Den or if it makes you three-pile this turn.



Quote

Buffoon Action Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a card from a supply pile you choose (same pile for all players).

It's okay, I can just move mine around.

In a 2 player possession game, this is now completely broken, as while possessing the opponent you could reveal a province to gain two provinces. Maybe make it a non-victory card?
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +340
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7556 on: November 18, 2020, 02:40:43 pm »
+1

In a 2 player possession game, this is now completely broken, as while possessing the opponent you could reveal a province to gain two provinces. Maybe make it a non-victory card?

Yes, thank you! Updated to add "non-Victory":



Quote

Buffoon • • Action – Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a non-Victory card from a supply pile you choose (same pile for all players).

« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 03:37:57 pm by Carline »
Logged

gambit05

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
  • Respect: +388
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7557 on: November 18, 2020, 03:17:58 pm »
+1




Quote

Buffoon Action Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a Copper.


Sorry for commenting again on this card, but I have the feeling that too many changes have been made, which at a certain point do not improve the card anymore. You started with an interesting idea, but in my opinion with some "Attack" options that were too harsh and with some wording that could be easily improved.

Then after many changes, back and forth, people still find a situation where a certain 2-card combination could be game breaking. But how often would that actually happen with so many official cards? Is that a bad thing? I don't know, but I prefer an elegant but relatively simple version instead of a wall of text that deals with all possible scenarios.

I lost a bit the overview, but I thing the version above is the one that is the most elegant and least controversial one. Of course, I may be wrong, it is just my opinion.
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +340
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7558 on: November 18, 2020, 03:56:56 pm »
+1

Sorry for commenting again on this card, but I have the feeling that too many changes have been made, which at a certain point do not improve the card anymore. You started with an interesting idea, but in my opinion with some "Attack" options that were too harsh and with some wording that could be easily improved.

Then after many changes, back and forth, people still find a situation where a certain 2-card combination could be game breaking. But how often would that actually happen with so many official cards? Is that a bad thing? I don't know, but I prefer an elegant but relatively simple version instead of a wall of text that deals with all possible scenarios.

I lost a bit the overview, but I thing the version above is the one that is the most elegant and least controversial one. Of course, I may be wrong, it is just my opinion.

Comments are always welcome.

I think you're right. This more complicated versions started when I thought the attack option would be a bit weak without a bonus for your turn, so changed "Copper" to "Curse" and tried to fix following issues.

I myself was not so satisfied with crescent wording and complexity, so I agree that the previous version you pointed is the best.

So I'm going back to it. To make it less confused in the forum, I edited my previous posts to reduce the size of images of intermediate versions.


Updated to go back to this version:



Quote

Buffoon Action Attack - Command


The player to your left reveals a card from their hand.
Choose one:
Gain a copy of it; or
play it twice, leaving it there; or
each other player gains a copy of it and a Copper.

Logged

anordinaryman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7559 on: November 18, 2020, 04:31:16 pm »
+3

Updated Submission



Quote
Developer | Action - Command | $4
Trash this or a card from your hand. The player to your left names
a cheaper and a more expensive non-Command non-Duration Action
card in the Supply. You may play any of them in any order, leaving
 them in the Supply.

Three Changes:
1. make the play of named cards  optional: It turns out that having the play be mandatory completely shuts Developer out of early trashing when cards like Beggar or Baron are on the table. And there's plenty of cards that you may not wish to play (not wanting to make a bad shuffle, not wanting to discard due to horse traders, not wanting a hex from a leprechaun, not wanting to silver-flood with trader... etc). I thought it was more interesting to give the option to play with -- otherwise in some kingdoms Developer will never be bought and that is less fun.
2. allow it to self-trash: I noticed the card was a little weak. Allowing the self trash strengthens it and allows you to play a random 5. Notice this isn't strictly better than Feast since you do not gain the 5 cost card, and your opponent chooses it for you.
3. not allow playing durations this would allow confusing situations if you self-trashed it. Now you have no card to keep track you have a duration to play.

Logged

Xen3k

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7560 on: November 18, 2020, 06:18:19 pm »
+1

>Outdated Submission<



Quote
Fruitcake - $4
Treasure
$2
Each other player gets +1 Coffers.
--------
When you buy this, +2VP and place this in the discard pile of the player to your left or right (you choose).

Ok, I have updated my submission to this version of Fruitcake. I reduced the cost so the VP reward is more in line with what is expected. It is a treasure card so it does not junk your opponents deck as effectively, but it cannot be passed back to you, so you can plan on getting those Coffers on a more regular basis. It is still a terrible investment if there is remodeling in the Kingdom. Still not completely sure if it is balanced or worth even buying.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 06:07:06 pm by Xen3k »
Logged

Aquila

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 379
  • Respect: +465
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7561 on: November 19, 2020, 04:58:27 am »
+1

Second edit for my entry:
Quote
Councillor - Action, $4 cost.
Reveal your hand; the player to your right chooses one of the cards. You may discard it for + $3 and +1VP.
I was bothered by Throning this basically meaning 'discard your hand. Gain a Province'. That's really boring. So it's no longer + $4 but this bonus.



Quote
Fruitcake - $4
Treasure
$2
Each other player gets +1 Coffers.
--------
When you buy this, +2VP and place this in the discard pile of the player to your left or right (you choose).

Ok, I have updated my submission to this version of Fruitcake. I reduced the cost so the VP reward is more in line with what is expected. It is a treasure card so it does not junk your opponents deck as effectively, but it cannot be passed back to you, so you can plan on getting those Coffers on a more regular basis. It is still a terrible investment if there is remodeling in the Kingdom. Still not completely sure if it is balanced or worth even buying.
This seems ultra political and/or game warping. Choose one of your adjacent opponents and heap these Silver-s on them. It will still decimate their strategy like copper junking, only the game could speed up massively; wouldn't a one-shot Baker be worth about the same as a Silver? Then that player can retaliate by throwing cakes back at you, and all the while the other players could enjoy the free coffers coming in and win.
Logged

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1063
  • Respect: +586
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7562 on: November 19, 2020, 06:29:24 am »
0

Second edit for my entry:
Quote
Councillor - Action, $4 cost.
Reveal your hand; the player to your right chooses one of the cards. You may discard it for + $3 and +1VP.
This is far too similar to Monument:
If you discard a Copper, it is equal to Monument.
If you play entirely with virtual Coins, this is better.
If you play with some non-Copper money, this is worse.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4860
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2497
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7563 on: November 19, 2020, 07:55:11 am »
+2

Are you sure the same argument doesn't say "Destrier is far too similar to Laboratory?"
Logged

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1063
  • Respect: +586
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7564 on: November 19, 2020, 09:22:24 am »
0

Are you sure the same argument doesn't say "Destrier is far too similar to Laboratory?"
In general your argument is correct, just because a card is similar to an existing one does not mean that it bad.

But Councillor started as pure terminal Coin card, the VP came later as buff so this definitely wasn't intended from the get-go as Monument variant. Momunent is far narrower than Village or Lab, i.e. it is not a basic card that warrants many variants but a fairly special card.

Also, Destrier does something interesting with its cost reduction. I don't see how the discarding of Councillor is similarly interesting (not to mention that it is likely weaker than Monument).
Logged

Xen3k

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7565 on: November 19, 2020, 11:02:46 am »
0





Quote
Fruitcake - $4
Treasure
$2
Each other player gets +1 Coffers.
--------
When you buy this, +2VP and place this in the discard pile of the player to your left or right (you choose).

Ok, I have updated my submission to this version of Fruitcake. I reduced the cost so the VP reward is more in line with what is expected. It is a treasure card so it does not junk your opponents deck as effectively, but it cannot be passed back to you, so you can plan on getting those Coffers on a more regular basis. It is still a terrible investment if there is remodeling in the Kingdom. Still not completely sure if it is balanced or worth even buying.
This seems ultra political and/or game warping. Choose one of your adjacent opponents and heap these Silver-s on them. It will still decimate their strategy like copper junking, only the game could speed up massively; wouldn't a one-shot Baker be worth about the same as a Silver? Then that player can retaliate by throwing cakes back at you, and all the while the other players could enjoy the free coffers coming in and win.

I agree completely that is ultra political. I am kinda embracing the challenge even though I dislike this "neighbors matter" kind of mechanic. Would it be better if you can only drop it in the left hand players deck? Was it better when you passed it on play?
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7566 on: November 19, 2020, 12:04:42 pm »
+1





Quote
Fruitcake - $4
Treasure
$2
Each other player gets +1 Coffers.
--------
When you buy this, +2VP and place this in the discard pile of the player to your left or right (you choose).

Ok, I have updated my submission to this version of Fruitcake. I reduced the cost so the VP reward is more in line with what is expected. It is a treasure card so it does not junk your opponents deck as effectively, but it cannot be passed back to you, so you can plan on getting those Coffers on a more regular basis. It is still a terrible investment if there is remodeling in the Kingdom. Still not completely sure if it is balanced or worth even buying.
This seems ultra political and/or game warping. Choose one of your adjacent opponents and heap these Silver-s on them. It will still decimate their strategy like copper junking, only the game could speed up massively; wouldn't a one-shot Baker be worth about the same as a Silver? Then that player can retaliate by throwing cakes back at you, and all the while the other players could enjoy the free coffers coming in and win.

I agree completely that is ultra political. I am kinda embracing the challenge even though I dislike this "neighbors matter" kind of mechanic. Would it be better if you can only drop it in the left hand players deck? Was it better when you passed it on play?

Passed on play then means no one should ever buy it since it doesn't actually junk your opponents deck, and over time everyone gets the same amount of coffers since it goes back to the player who buys it. The 2VP isn't quite worth that. Think about how rarely Baths is "bought."

I like the concept though. I can think of two ways to keep it still an attack and thus a card people want to buy when there are more than 2 players. Both of them are complicated:
1. Have the fruitcakes exchange themselves for a differently named fruitcake when they pass. Have the exchanging mechanism end after n exchanges where n < # of players - 1, or have it change to a final good card after n exchanges where n  = # of players -1. This requires a complicated set up that changes based on the number of players, but once it is setup, it's very easy to follow the rules of.
2. keep track of who has bought fruitcakes with tokens. When you buy a fruitcake, take a fruitcake token. When you play a fruitcake, pass it to the next player who does not have more fruitcake tokens than you.

Now that I think about it, option 2 isn't as complicated as I thought and is potentially the best way to do it. You could tweak it to be "does not have more" or "has less" which change the effect if two people have equal tokens. You can play with 12 in the pile so theoretically players can have an equal number of fruitcake tokens.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 03:33:18 pm by anordinaryman »
Logged

BBobb

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
  • My brother says thief is amazing.
  • Respect: +84
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7567 on: November 19, 2020, 04:15:56 pm »
0

This is the first time I have ever posted a fan card, so it probably is awful.

v1 (outdated)
? - Treasure
Cost - $4?

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers


Tell me how under/overpowered this card.

v2
Escrow - Action
Cost - $4 (outdated)

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

v3
Escrow - Action
Cost - $4

Reveal your hand. The player to your left chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

« Last Edit: November 20, 2020, 01:23:58 am by BBobb »
Logged
Hand - King's Court, Ruined Village, Estate, Copper, Possession
Turn -
BBobb plays King's Court
and plays a Ruined Village.
getting +1 Action
and plays the Ruined Village again.
getting +1 Action
and plays the Ruined village a third time.
getting +1 Action.
BBobb plays a Copper.
BBobb buys a Poor House.
(BBobb draws: 2 King's Courts and 3 Possessions)
BBobb=GOD

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8975
  • Respect: +9771
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7568 on: November 19, 2020, 04:45:15 pm »
0

This is the first time I have ever posted a fan card, so it probably is awful.

? - Treasure
Cost - $4?

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

Tell me how under/overpowered this card.

It suffers from the "strictly better than Silver at " problem. Both options look pretty strong... if your opponent chooses +, then it's simply a Gold; which is clearly way too good. So the only way for it to not be too strong is if the other option gets chosen. A simple Silver that gives coffers instead of coins is probably balanced at ; hard to say.

So the question is whether the fact that you will get whichever option is worse for you at this moment matters that much. And I don't think it will. No matter what is chosen, you're still getting a stronger-than- effect from playing the card.

It might also be slow to play; your opponent needs to add up all the treasure that they see you have; and decide from that whether an extra will help this turn or not.
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

BBobb

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
  • My brother says thief is amazing.
  • Respect: +84
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7569 on: November 19, 2020, 05:12:17 pm »
0

This is the first time I have ever posted a fan card, so it probably is awful.

? - Treasure
Cost - $4?

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

Tell me how under/overpowered this card.

It suffers from the "strictly better than Silver at " problem. Both options look pretty strong... if your opponent chooses +, then it's simply a Gold; which is clearly way too good. So the only way for it to not be too strong is if the other option gets chosen. A simple Silver that gives coffers instead of coins is probably balanced at ; hard to say.

So the question is whether the fact that you will get whichever option is worse for you at this moment matters that much. And I don't think it will. No matter what is chosen, you're still getting a stronger-than- effect from playing the card.

It might also be slow to play; your opponent needs to add up all the treasure that they see you have; and decide from that whether an extra will help this turn or not.

You are totally correct. Don't know how I didn't think of that given the fact that I have literally read through this every single card in this thread in the last couple weeks, and have also seen many, many other cards. What if it was a terminal action instead? I'm assuming that that is still too OP, but more experienced players will tell.

? - Action
Cost - $4

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers
« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 05:17:05 pm by BBobb »
Logged
Hand - King's Court, Ruined Village, Estate, Copper, Possession
Turn -
BBobb plays King's Court
and plays a Ruined Village.
getting +1 Action
and plays the Ruined Village again.
getting +1 Action
and plays the Ruined village a third time.
getting +1 Action.
BBobb plays a Copper.
BBobb buys a Poor House.
(BBobb draws: 2 King's Courts and 3 Possessions)
BBobb=GOD

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8975
  • Respect: +9771
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7570 on: November 19, 2020, 05:22:50 pm »
0

This is the first time I have ever posted a fan card, so it probably is awful.

? - Treasure
Cost - $4?

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

Tell me how under/overpowered this card.

It suffers from the "strictly better than Silver at " problem. Both options look pretty strong... if your opponent chooses +, then it's simply a Gold; which is clearly way too good. So the only way for it to not be too strong is if the other option gets chosen. A simple Silver that gives coffers instead of coins is probably balanced at ; hard to say.

So the question is whether the fact that you will get whichever option is worse for you at this moment matters that much. And I don't think it will. No matter what is chosen, you're still getting a stronger-than- effect from playing the card.

It might also be slow to play; your opponent needs to add up all the treasure that they see you have; and decide from that whether an extra will help this turn or not.

You are totally correct. Don't know how I didn't think of that given the fact that I have literally read through this every single card in this thread in the last couple weeks, and have also seen many, many other cards. What if it was a terminal action instead? I'm assuming that that is still too OP, but more experienced players will tell.

? - Action
Cost - $4

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

This seems good, or it might work at if it's too strong; I'm not good enough to tell.
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

silverspawn

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 4860
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2497
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7571 on: November 19, 2020, 05:36:34 pm »
0

Definitely not 5$.
Logged

Xen3k

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • Respect: +110
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7572 on: November 19, 2020, 05:59:28 pm »
0



Quote
Fruitcake - $4
Treasure
Choose one: +$2; or +1 Coffers.
Each other player gets +1 Coffers.
At the start of Cleanup, the next player to your left that does not have more Fruitcake Tokens than you gains this.
-------
When you buy this, +2%, take a Fruitcake token, and place this in the discard pile of the player to your left.

Ok, third version of this abomination. I have to admit that I gave it the optional portion at the top just so the text would be legible. I have incorporated the brilliant Fruitcake Token concept suggested by anordinaryman. The card will now pass left on play, but will skip players that have more Fruitcake tokens. You have to actually buy the card to get Fruitcake tokens, so players can't just ignore the Fruitcakes unless they think they can deal with them another way. The passing is done as a gain effect, so some reactions can interfere/interact with that. I am contemplating making it start in the deck of the player who buys it, but that does not really save any lines of text, and that would be the only reason for that change. I am going to likely just leave it at as is. Thanks for all the feedback, please provide more as it is a great help.

Edit: As suggested, this would be a 12 card stack to allow equal opportunity in multiplayer games.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 06:12:07 pm by Xen3k »
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +340
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7573 on: November 19, 2020, 06:05:32 pm »
+1

? - Action
Cost - $4

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

This seems good, or it might work at if it's too strong; I'm not good enough to tell.

Definitely not 5$.

First option (terminal Gold) is like Legionary without attack or Livery without gain Horses. Second option (2 Coffers) is like Butcher without trashing or Villain without attack. So, I think it' ok at .
Logged

LittleFish

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 401
  • Respect: +174
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7574 on: November 19, 2020, 06:07:14 pm »
+1

This is the first time I have ever posted a fan card, so it probably is awful.

? - Treasure
Cost - $4?

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers

Tell me how under/overpowered this card.

It suffers from the "strictly better than Silver at " problem. Both options look pretty strong... if your opponent chooses +, then it's simply a Gold; which is clearly way too good. So the only way for it to not be too strong is if the other option gets chosen. A simple Silver that gives coffers instead of coins is probably balanced at ; hard to say.

So the question is whether the fact that you will get whichever option is worse for you at this moment matters that much. And I don't think it will. No matter what is chosen, you're still getting a stronger-than- effect from playing the card.

It might also be slow to play; your opponent needs to add up all the treasure that they see you have; and decide from that whether an extra will help this turn or not.

You are totally correct. Don't know how I didn't think of that given the fact that I have literally read through this every single card in this thread in the last couple weeks, and have also seen many, many other cards. What if it was a terminal action instead? I'm assuming that that is still too OP, but more experienced players will tell.

? - Action
Cost - $4

Reveal your hand. Your opponent chooses one for you: +$3; or +2 Coffers
If you're looking for name, Escrow could work.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 301 302 [303] 304 305 ... 327  All
 

Page created in 0.098 seconds with 20 queries.