Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 162  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 117469 times)

1 Member and 14 Guests are viewing this topic.

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2125 on: May 28, 2019, 10:53:00 pm »
0

3)I would also suggest making the on-buy ability optional, but that's more of a preference thing.

You can always choose to take 0 ; in which case you would get a card costing or less on your mat. Why would you ever choose to not do that if it were optional?

If you already had all cards that 4 or less on your mat and you don't want to bring the game closer to an ending. (especially true if there's few cards that are 4 or less).
Logged

Kudasai

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
  • Respect: +235
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2126 on: May 29, 2019, 01:54:28 am »
0

Quote from: scolapasta
Lastly, the intent was that these cards are not part of your deck at the end of the game. This works differently that Inheritance, so I'd be curious to hear opinions on that (and if they do count, should I also limit them to non-Victory?)

The general consensus is that they do count towards your deck at the end of the game. Although I don't believe this has always been the case and a good argument can be made that they do not in fact count at the end of the game.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 01:57:34 am by Kudasai »
Logged

4est

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: 4est
  • Respect: +480
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2127 on: May 29, 2019, 09:18:09 am »
+5

Challenge #30: Design a Debt card (or card-shaped thing): Commentary & Results

Thank you everyone for the submissions, there were a lot of fun ideas!  OPs are hyperlinked, shortlisted entries are bolded.



Lender by naitchman
A Smithy that lets you draw an extra card for 1 Debt or pay off 1 Debt before your Buy phase.  The ability to remove Debt synergizes nicely with the cardís effects and cost (and other Debt cards as well).  In the early game, itís uncommon for the extra card to be worth that much more than the Debt it costs, but later these become cheap Hunting Grounds that can help pay for themselves.  The Vault effect comes at a steep cost, but players may be able to mitigate this with Lenders of their own. 

Monoculture by Frolouch
Hopefully, this is the final version of the like thirty I think I saw.  The variety theme is nice, though the potion cost feels a bit strangeóI get that itís there to prevent people from being able to basically open Platinum, but I wonder if costing $6 might be a better solution.  I also worry this may play too similarly to Capital.

Recompense by Aquila
An interesting Remodel variant with a nice gain-and-play feature.  The wording for adding it to your next hand doesnít feel quite rightóI think there should be set-aside language in there somewhere, though it opens up strategies where you avoid paying off debt to keep using it.  The <6> cost feels a bit high, especially since it gives you more Debt each time you play it.

Grant by Gubump
I believe Donald X. has mentioned a similar card that he tested before settling on Capital.  The non-Victory clause helps prevent Grant from being too strong as a finisher, but the effect still allows for some unique plays.  I donít love the cost reduction wording, but I canít think of anything better.  <6> also feels just slightly too expensive. 

Blueprints by King Leon
A cantrip $5 gainer with clever use of Debt to keep its gains to usually one per turn.  Simple and straightforward, I like it. 

Hostage/Ransom by ClouduHieh
As others have already pointed out, Hostageís attack is way stronger than Witch and costs less.  Iíve never been a fan of just slapping negative VP on an OP card in hopes of balancing it, as even -3 VP here isnít enough to dissuade someone from opening this in every game itís in.  Ransom is expensive and will be revealed far too late to have any hopes of stopping Hostageís onslaught.

Draw Bridge by Kudasai
Cute naming puns aside, the Highway plus Buy for Debt actually feels surprisingly balanced.  The fact that its cost reduction canít help gain more copies is what makes this card so interesting.  Playing with Draw Bridge as your payload will feel like playing with City Quarter as your only Village or Drawóthereís not really a lot of ways to easily get a bunch of them quickly or cheaply, so you have to be even more strategic about when you get them and how you plan to pay for them.  Nice one!

Prophet by majiponi
Essentially this allows players to guarantee a $1/$5 opening or a $3/$3 opening in case you absolutely must open Mountebank or Sentry or Double Ambassador or something.  Iím not sure how often choosing to buy this or not would make for interesting choices, and it doesnít affect the game beyond the opening.

Classroom by pubby
A cheap Lab that gives you Debt, similar to Asperís Scientist.  The Debt cost means Workshop variants canít gain it, which I donít love, but it otherwise seems mostly balanced.

Tollkeeper by herw
Itís Tax but as a card!  The non-terminal Coffers are solid payload and the Tax effect works a bit like Embargo, coming before you buy cards, which is always a bit awkward.  As with Tax, the dream of hitting the cards your opponent wants but never the ones you want is usually far from reality since you often end up kicking yourself as you buy the card you just Taxed earlier. 

Revenant by segura
Ignoring the heated debates over how attacks scale with player count, the inconsistency Revenantís benefits and attack make this one a hard sell for me, though I quite like the idea here.  Sometimes it nets you just one or two Coffers and doesnít hurt your opponents at all (and can potentially hurt you instead as segura mentioned), while other times it can be a windfall of Coffers.  Also, the fact that you are affected by both other playersí Revenantís and your own also seems to stack poorly, even just in two-player.

Flashing Lights by boggreaux
A one-shot Sea Hag that turns into Wisps lateróitís an interesting concept, however there are several problems.  First, this needs Sea Hagís discard the top card wording to prevent multiples from leaving large stacks of Curses on the deck.  Secondly, I worry this will lead to degenerate IGG-like slogs, though at least the Wisps will help you cycle through the junk.  And finally, the Debt cost feels out of place hereóit antisynergizes with Wisps and doesnít seem to really add anything otherwise. 

Planned City by NoMoreFun
Another take Debt for +Cards, I like that when you donít need the draw, these can help pay off the Debt from other Planned Cities.  Fairly simple and straightforward, my only concern is that <4> might a bit cheap for what are essentially Lost Cities much of the time.  I like it for the most part though.

Broker by mail-mi
The ideas here are great, but I think the attack might be a bit too harsh.  Even without getting hit twice for the Militia attack, getting <2> is like two Cutpurses which is pretty brutal, especially in the early game.  Perhaps <1> might be better hereóthen it would be more similar to taking the -$1 token and still allows for multiples to Militia.  The Debt-Bridge effect is creative, allowing to hit price points you couldnít usually, though at the cost of making cheap things (and Debt cards) more expensive if you play too many.  Very neat.

Banker by faust
Itís a unique take on a cheap Band of Misfits variant, but I agree with Commodore Chuckles that the Debt penalty is too harsh.  There are very few cards Iíd be willing to pay full price for to play once in most situations, which makes Banker a tough sell in many kingdoms.  Halving the Debt penalty might be better, or perhaps a static amount like <2> or <3>. 

Mortgage by Commodore Chuckles
Wow, there are some crazy numbers on this card!  The 20 VP of course is alluring, but man, that Debt hurts.  The Treasure ability that lets you buy cards while in Debt is cool and makes for some tough decisions of when to buy cards and when to just bite the bullet and make your payments.  My biggest worry here is that this card may lead to some unfun strategies of just buying them one by one and then paying off Debt, while ignoring most other VP sources.  20 VP is a bonkers amount of points and as long as you have a plan to be out of Debt before the game ends, itís hard to think of boards where you wouldnít just always go for these.  Tricky to say though without playing it but itís certainly a bold idea!  If nothing else, this card wins the Most Thematic award as itís a way too real reminder of my own actual mortgage.

Coachman by Freddy10
Another take Debt for +Cards.  This one is the simplest of the bunch, and I think I actually like the $2 price point rather that $3.  Itís nice that it can just be Moat when you donít need a Hunting Grounds. Very clean and straightforward design.   

Insurance by hhelibebcnofnena
The wording here is very confusingóplease help me understand how this is supposed to work.  If itís supposed to be a one-shot, itís a one-time +2 Cards for <8> or possibly a lot more, something nobody would ever buy.  If itís not one-shot and the +2 Cards is supposed to be every turn or something, thatís better, a sort of Hireling variant, though I still donít like the ďinterestĒ penalty.  Your mention of Sinister Plot makes me assume itís closer to the latter, but the current wording definitely isnít right. 

Royal Academy by Gazbag
I slightly preferred the first version of this card personally, but I still like this version too.  It is a very powerful card to be sure, but as with many of the official <8> cards, itís not good to open with and it canít really help you get more of them.  Tying the gaining to the throning like Disciple is key, and while the two cards are indeed very similar, having this one as a Kingdom card will make it play very differently from the Traveller version.

Student by scolapasta
I like the concept of Student a lotóa Band of Misfits that slowly gets better and better, but it seems like the amount of text it takes to get this to work might not be worth it.  It seems relatively balanced in its current state, but I canít imagine trying to remember all the exact wording on the cards while playing with itóďWhen do I turn cards over again?  How much Debt do I need to take again?Ē  Also, the Debt interaction also feels somewhat forced hereóit works but it isnít clear that itís the best way to accomplish what itís trying to accomplish.  Overpay or something else might be simpler.  It would be interesting to see a revamped version with less tortured wording that somehow retains a similar idea. 



Runner Up: Blueprints by King Leon

WINNER: Draw Bridge by Kudasai


Congrats to Kudasai and thanks again everyone for participating!
Logged

Kudasai

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
  • Respect: +235
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2128 on: May 29, 2019, 06:41:05 pm »
+1

CHALLENGE #31 - FEELING VULNERABLE

Design a Duration card that creates some sort of vulnerability to you while it is in play. I'll leave the term "vulnerability" mostly up to your interpretation, but you can think of it along the lines of the following:

(1) Something that alters the game in a way that might not help you or may help your opponents
(2) Something that effects you negatively
(3) Something that effects your opponents positively

I think the power level of the card can be above average compared to it's cost. How much stronger will depend on the vulnerability part. A word of caution though, very strong on-play cards with a very strong counter vulnerability will likely just end up being swingy and may not score well.

No Travelers please, but everything else is fair game! You can do Split piles and cards that gain from the non-Supply so long as there is no more than 2 cards per submission and one of them is a Duration with the vulnerability part.

I will do my best to judge on creativity, uniqueness, how the on-play and vulnerability interact directly or indirectly, and balance. Less so on balance as no official cards exist that implement this.

I'm being intentionally vague on what a "vulnerability" is, but if more clarification or examples are needed please ask. I want to provide enough information so everyone gets the challenge, but not enough to spoil potential card ideas.

Lastly, I'm going to make this a 6-day turn around as I can only really judge on Tuesdays. So judging will start around 12:00PM on Tue June 4th (PDT / GMT-7). I'll give everyone the standard 24 hours heads up though.

Good luck and I can't wait to see what everyone comes up with!
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 07:14:24 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
0



Coincidentally, my prompt would have also involved Durations if I won the previous contest.

EDIT: This is no longer my submission. My submission is now General (on the next page).
« Last Edit: May 30, 2019, 11:24:47 pm by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2130 on: May 29, 2019, 10:34:54 pm »
+1

This is no longer my submission (Due to it being changed to a project). I'm leaving this up so reading through the thread doesn't get confusing. (My submission is now Grand Tour; see later)

A couple of things:
1) Thematically nobody wants to give you charity if they know you have money of your own. :)
2) The "if this card is in play" part is important so the effect doesn't continue after you trash it.
3) Also you can't counterfeit or crown this since the second time you play it, it will trash itself.
4) Not sure if the pricing is correct. I'm open to hear other people's opinions. I'm trying to find cards to compare this to. Closest I can find is Treasury ( it's kind of like +$1 for rest of the game with victory card caveat), though obviously losing the ability to play money is a big consideration.
5) A couple places I could see this working: double tactician, poor house, engines that don't have good enough draw to deal with treasures anyway, rush strategies.

6) I wanted Kudasai's verdict on this. Does this count as a vulnerability? You aren't really restricted per se, but playing treasures defeats the purpose of this card. So in effect, it's a duration that (kind of) prevents you from playing treasures.

Note: This card has been updated
1) so it only works on subsequent turns
2) only works for the 1st buy phase each turn (to prevent piledriving villas)
3) Has while in play effect to get rid of tracking issues
« Last Edit: May 30, 2019, 08:45:48 pm by naitchman »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2131 on: May 29, 2019, 10:47:00 pm »
0



Being able to simply forgo playing Treasures and buy a $4-cost every single turn until you do play a Treasure (and still having +$4 the turn you do) is WAY too powerful for just $5, especially since it's non-terminal. It also still allows you to play Treasures the same turn as it since you can simply play the Charity last. I would buy it over Platinum most of the time. I would price it at $9 or $10.

Charity also lets you buy the Villa pile in one turn as worded, since it would give you $4 at the start of every extra Buy phase that Villa gives you (after its extra Action phase).
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 10:49:01 pm by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2132 on: May 29, 2019, 10:50:32 pm »
0


Being able to simply forgo playing Treasures and buy a $4-cost every single turn until you do play a Treasure (and still having +$4 the turn you do) is WAY too powerful for just $5, especially since it's non-terminal.
That sounds pretty similar to alms which doesn't require you to buy a card.

It also still allows you to play Treasures the same turn as it since you can simply play the Charity last. I would buy it over Platinum most of the time. I would price it at $9 or $10.
Right after I uploaded it I had a similar thought, so I already changed it. I still don't think it's better than platinum anyway since it can only be used once that way. definitely not $9 or $10.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 10:54:38 pm by naitchman »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2133 on: May 29, 2019, 11:01:11 pm »
0


Being able to simply forgo playing Treasures and buy a $4-cost every single turn until you do play a Treasure (and still having +$4 the turn you do) is WAY too powerful for just $5, especially since it's non-terminal.
That sounds pretty similar to alms which doesn't require you to buy a card.

It also still allows you to play Treasures the same turn as it since you can simply play the Charity last. I would buy it over Platinum most of the time. I would price it at $9 or $10.
Right after I uploaded it I had a similar thought, so I already changed it. I still don't think it's better than platinum anyway since it can only be used once that way. definitely not $9 or $10.

Alms does still take a Buy. Buying Events still takes a Buy. I still think it should probably cost $6, though.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 11:03:56 pm by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2134 on: May 29, 2019, 11:02:54 pm »
0

Charity also lets you buy the Villa pile in one turn as worded, since it would give you $4 at the start of every extra Buy phase that Villa gives you (after its extra Action phase).

Fair point. Forgot about villa. I'm going to fix that.

Quote
Alms does still take a Buy. Buying Events still takes a Buy. I still think it should probably cost $6, though.

So does buying a card for the $4 that charity gives you. Charity requires you to buy a $5 card then start gaining $4 cards; with alms you can start gaining $4 cards right away. I still don't see why this is stronger than alms.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2019, 11:13:52 pm by naitchman »
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2135 on: May 29, 2019, 11:04:03 pm »
0

Charity also lets you buy the Villa pile in one turn as worded, since it would give you $4 at the start of every extra Buy phase that Villa gives you (after its extra Action phase).

Fair point. Forgot about villa. I'm going to fix that.

I would recommend this wording:
"At the start of your first Buy phase of each turn that this remains in play:"
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

hhelibebcnofnena

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 339
  • Respect: +201
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2136 on: May 29, 2019, 11:44:15 pm »
0

Charity also lets you buy the Villa pile in one turn as worded, since it would give you $4 at the start of every extra Buy phase that Villa gives you (after its extra Action phase).

Fair point. Forgot about villa. I'm going to fix that.

I would recommend this wording:
"At the start of your first Buy phase of each turn that this remains in play:"

Why does it have to activate at the start of the buy phase? There's only two situations I can think of where it matters (Storyteller and Black Market).
Logged
Hydrogen Helium Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Fluorine Neon Sodium

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2137 on: May 29, 2019, 11:55:28 pm »
0

Charity is intended to stay out and work in a deck that doesn't use treasures. I doubt using it as a one shot is as good as some people are implying.
1) If you're using a one shot for coin it's usually to reach a specific thresh hold fast. If that thresh hold is $5, well that's just stupid. You bought the charity for $5 so you could reach $5? Obviously it would have to be a $6+ card. There aren't a high proportion of those cards so this wouldn't come up so often. When it does, it may be worthwhile to one shot this card (grand market, kings court); you still have to pass up permanently having a $5 card, which are usually strong and may be able to help you reach that thresh hold anyway.
2) You might say that you're using it for a one shot $4 with +buy (maybe from market square, it doesn't matter).  You'd still have to be buying at least one card that cost $6+ with those buys or it wouldn't make sense, and if you're buying $6+ cards we revert back to point #1. If you're only buying cards that are $5 or less, than you could have bought a $5 card outright instead of charity and then you would've been able to buy the other cards you wanted with $4 less (for instance, if you wanted to buy a two $5 cards with your charity, you could have bought one of them instead of charity and then you'd have $6 this turn instead of $10; enough to buy the other card you wanted). It's kind of like when new players are confused that gold costs $6 ("Why would I pay $6 for $3?). They're right, if you didn't get to play the gold over and over again. So why would you pay $5 for $4? Other than reaching a thresh hold (or some edge cases) it wouldn't make sense.
3) The best comparisons for virtual coin one shots are pixie, mining village and Wine Merchant. Mining village is a non-terminal one shot that gives you $2. But it's obviously better than that since it draws 1 card and is not just non terminal but is a village. In addition you don't have to one shot it if you don't want to and it still plays as a village. So a non terminal one shot for +$2 should clearly cost less than 4. Pixie is an even better comparison. It's a non terminal one shot that (could) give you +$2 (Field's gift or Forest's gift). It also draws and will give you +2 actions or +2 buys. And it only costs $2. Charity on the other hand is a $4 one shot that works on the turn after you play it and costs $5. If a one shot $2 should cost <$2 I don't think this is too cheap at $5. Wine Merchant (if never called) is a terminal one shot $4 the turn you play it with a + buy (you can also call if you need to later). Charity is a non terminal one shot $4 the turn after you play it (with no +buy). Seems like a fair trade off to me.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2019, 12:13:35 am by naitchman »
Logged

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2138 on: May 30, 2019, 12:07:34 am »
0

Why does it have to activate at the start of the buy phase? There's only two situations I can think of where it matters (Storyteller and Black Market).

It's a matter of preference. To me, it feels like treasures should work in the buy phase, not the action phase (excluding text under the line, usually actions work in action phase and treasures work in the buy phase). Also, I felt I didn't want it to work with storyteller or black market. The idea is you get a big bonus of $4 but you have to use it in the buy phase and you don't get to use any treasures. Not being able to use black market or storyteller seems like it should be part of the trade-off.
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2139 on: May 30, 2019, 12:12:01 am »
0

This is a nitpick, but the word "buy" in "buy phase" should be capitalized.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

Kudasai

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 438
  • Respect: +235
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2140 on: May 30, 2019, 12:47:29 am »
0

6) I wanted Kudasai's verdict on this. Does this count as a vulnerability? You aren't really restricted per se, but playing treasures defeats the purpose of this card. So in effect, it's a duration that (kind of) prevents you from playing treasures.

Yes, this satisfies my vague definition of vulnerable. :)
Logged

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 338
  • Respect: +131
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2141 on: May 30, 2019, 02:36:19 am »
0

Here is my tentative submission (pending approval).

I like the idea but given that you can only buy one copy of it in a Kingdom with enough virtual money, I think that it is strategically a bit too straightforward.
Logged

King Leon

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 455
  • Respect: +360
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2142 on: May 30, 2019, 02:55:42 am »
0

Here is my tentative submission (pending approval).

Black Market does not count as Buy phase and also comes with virtual money, which is a very powerful combination.
Logged

faust

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2567
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +3542
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2143 on: May 30, 2019, 06:02:32 am »
0

Charity is going to have serious tracking issues if it is removed from play (via trashing or Mandarin) and then played again.
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.

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 688
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +892
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2144 on: May 30, 2019, 06:45:53 am »
+1


Logged

MeNowDealWithIt

  • Chancellor
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 22
  • Shuffle iT Username: MeNowDealWithIt
  • Why does it say "Pearl Diver"
  • Respect: +31
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2145 on: May 30, 2019, 08:25:58 am »
0

Motherly Witch
5$ Action - Attack - Duration
Each other player gains a curse.
Now and at the start of your next turn, +2 cards
--
While this is in play, when another player plays an attack card, gain a copper.
Logged

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2146 on: May 30, 2019, 10:41:19 am »
0

Charity is going to have serious tracking issues if it is removed from play (via trashing or Mandarin) and then played again.

Interesting point. It says "if this is in play". I wonder if it would fall under a lose trackish type of rule since it's no longer the "same" card when played the 2nd time (since charity lost track of itself). I think I'll just fix it by saying, "While this card is in play" rather than "if this card is in play".
Logged

naitchman

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 166
  • Respect: +121
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2147 on: May 30, 2019, 10:43:51 am »
0

I like the idea but given that you can only buy one copy of it in a Kingdom with enough virtual money, I think that it is strategically a bit too straightforward.

It works pretty similar to a project (which you can also only buy one copy of). It has less to do with how you'd play this one card, but more to do with how you'd structure your deck around it.
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 678
  • Respect: +390
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2148 on: May 30, 2019, 11:31:08 am »
0



Considering that it's only one card that gives your opponents Coffers when they gain it, I don't think the drawback is big enough to price this the same as a Remodel when it's way better.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

segura

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 338
  • Respect: +131
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #2149 on: May 30, 2019, 12:32:14 pm »
0



The idea to discard a Duration at the start of the next turn, instead of the end, seems interesting. No idea about whether this makes the card too good though. One way to nerf (?) it is conditioning the discard bonus for the other play on the type of the discarded card (e.g. Action - Villager, Treasure - Coffers, Victory - +1 Card) but that would lead to too much text.

The Potion cost is mainly there to make non-mirror play more likely.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 84 85 [86] 87 88 ... 162  All
 

Page created in 0.103 seconds with 21 queries.