Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 151 152 [153] 154 155 ... 197  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 190333 times)

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3800 on: October 17, 2019, 10:38:01 am »
+2



The idea is that it's like a Throne Room, but you can choose a different card for the 2nd play. It might be too flexible and should perhaps require the card to be exactly the same cost as the first card but it can't play copies of itself, which is a pretty substantial downside vs other Thrones. the wording could probably be better too, I'm not the best at wording these cards.

the way its worded now allows it to play Treasures for the second card; is that intentional?

DEGwer

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Shuffle iT Username: DEGwer
  • Respect: +21
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3801 on: October 17, 2019, 10:49:29 am »
+2

Quote
General
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Choose one: Trash this to play a non-Command non-Duration Action from the Supply, leaving it there; or play up to 2 differently named Actions you played this turn before you played this that are still in play.

General with +1 Card token will produce very simple infinite loop with Lurker. We can
- Play General1.
-- Draw General2 by effect of +1 Card token.
-- Use a Lurker by General1 and Gain General3 from the trash.
-- Trash General1.
- Play General2.
-- Draw General3 by effect of +1 Card token.
-- Use a Lurker by General2 and Gain General1 from the trash.
-- Trash General2.
...and so on.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +966
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3802 on: October 17, 2019, 10:55:59 am »
+1



The idea is that it's like a Throne Room, but you can choose a different card for the 2nd play. It might be too flexible and should perhaps require the card to be exactly the same cost as the first card but it can't play copies of itself, which is a pretty substantial downside vs other Thrones. the wording could probably be better too, I'm not the best at wording these cards.

the way its worded now allows it to play Treasures for the second card; is that intentional?

Nope, that's a mistake! Thanks for pointing it out, I've fixed it.
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 722
  • Respect: +442
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3803 on: October 17, 2019, 01:25:18 pm »
+1

Falconer
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
The player to your left reveals a non-Command Action card from their hand (or reveals they can't). Choose one: +1 Card and +1 Action; or play the revealed card, leaving it there.
Delegate
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
Each other player reveals their hand. Play a revealed non-Command, non-Duration Action, leaving it there. If you couldn't, +2 Cards.
The old "play Actions from another player's hand" trick doesn't work very well because you stop if from working by not buying Actions, so the question is how you general combat a largely Treasure-centered strategy in the design of the card.
4est's Falconer gets around it by making it a cantrip instead of the worst Action in the player to your left's hand.  I think the limitation is huge.  If you play Falconer terminally they can reveal a terminal card the you can't play.  If you play Falconer non-terminally, they reveal a minimally useful non-terminal, again making Falconer of only marginal use.  I think a strong money-centric Strategy will make Falconer a waste of time.
Gubump's Delegate instead turns into a Moat instead of the best Action in any other player's hand.  Hitting anyone's any card means that this scales poorly into multiplayer.  The save of Moat is probably even worse than Falconer's cantrip, so I would likely still run good money against Delegate.
I recommend the catch for not having an Action to play be better than the Action play, honestly.  Me revealing an Action to your Command-card should make your Command card worse.

I think that people will still buy Action cards just as much as normal even with Delegate/Falconer in the Kingdom (and my experience playtesting Delegate shows that this is true). A key thing that I don't think you're taking into account is that in order to play an opponent's Action with Delegate, you have to have a Delegate in hand while your opponent also has that Action in hand, whereas to play that same Action card, your opponent just needs to have it in hand. So overall, having the actual Action itself is still better than having a Delegate, and thus having Action cards is still well worth doing.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2019, 01:26:35 pm by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1218
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1254
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3804 on: October 17, 2019, 02:14:48 pm »
+1



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?

Edit: Fixed grammar etc.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2019, 08:53:56 pm by mail-mi »
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

grep

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
  • Respect: +101
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3805 on: October 17, 2019, 02:24:16 pm »
+1


Traitor
$3 - Action - Command
The player to your right reveals their hand.
You may trash this. If you did, play a non-Command Action card from their hand, leaving it there.
If you didn't, +1 Action, +1 Buy
Heirloom: Bribe

Bribe
$3 - Treasure - Heirloom
$1
When you play this, gain a non-Treasure card costing up to $3

Upd. wording with DEGwer's input:

Traitor
$3 - Action - Command
The player to your right reveals their hand.
You may set this aside to play a non-Command Action card from that player's hand, leaving it there.
If you didn't, +1 Action, +1 Buy.
At the end of your turn, trash the set aside Traitor.
Heirloom: Bribe

Bribe stays the same.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2019, 05:20:05 pm by grep »
Logged

Abel_K

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3806 on: October 17, 2019, 02:38:35 pm »
0



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?

It seems to me that Captain is more interesting, because he allows you to choise before your turn what will be more useful with your new hand, particularly can give you an Action more, and you are happy with it if terminal actions in hand...
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1218
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1254
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3807 on: October 17, 2019, 02:46:07 pm »
0



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?

It seems to me that Captain is more interesting, because he allows you to choise before your turn what will be more useful with your new hand, particularly can give you an Action more, and you are happy with it if terminal actions in hand...

I think they have different strengths and weaknesses. This allows me to get +6 Cards with a Smithy, which is really nice. Im trading a start-of-turn effect from next turn for a bigger bang this turn.

In one way, this is like a Throne Room that (almost) never misses.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

Abel_K

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 40
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3808 on: October 17, 2019, 02:59:10 pm »
0



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?

It seems to me that Captain is more interesting, because he allows you to choise before your turn what will be more useful with your new hand, particularly can give you an Action more, and you are happy with it if terminal actions in hand...

I think they have different strengths and weaknesses. This allows me to get +6 Cards with a Smithy, which is really nice. Im trading a start-of-turn effect from next turn for a bigger bang this turn.

In one way, this is like a Throne Room that (almost) never misses.

Right !  :)
Logged

ShadowHawk

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: Contest #48: Design a Command
« Reply #3809 on: October 17, 2019, 03:08:03 pm »
+2



I came up with this one about 3 months ago, but just recently changed it into a Command type. The Command type is present to prevent an infinite loop (play Delegate, play opponent's BoM, play Delegate from Supply, play same BoM, repeat ad infinitum). It also happens to be one of my most playtested fan cards if not the most.

I like this a lot. Nothing more to add.
Logged

ShadowHawk

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 59
  • Respect: +15
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3810 on: October 17, 2019, 03:12:51 pm »
0



Ideally, for theme, there would be a University mat or a Schola mat, but this game has enough mats as it is so I left it for the Tavern mat.

The Scholasticus collects research and students in the forms of Actions and then directs them. You need at least 2 of them to make the Command portion work.

Scholasticus cannot avoid loops.
Put +$1 token on this. Play this to set aside it. Play another, choosing that Scholasticus, choosing it, ...

Thank you majiponi. I forgot the "non-Command". This fixes it, yes?
Logged

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3811 on: October 17, 2019, 03:14:16 pm »
0



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?
I like when he adds +1/+1 to all my Vampires. but uh also you've got some typos - Commander / non-Commander, lowercase supply. Still, seems about right pricewise, and like a decent card regardless.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2019, 03:58:17 pm by spineflu »
Logged

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 225
  • Respect: +170
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3812 on: October 17, 2019, 03:20:01 pm »
+1



Ideally, for theme, there would be a University mat or a Schola mat, but this game has enough mats as it is so I left it for the Tavern mat.

The Scholasticus collects research and students in the forms of Actions and then directs them. You need at least 2 of them to make the Command portion work.

Scholasticus cannot avoid loops.
Put +$1 token on this. Play this to set aside it. Play another, choosing that Scholasticus, choosing it, ...

Thank you majiponi. I forgot the "non-Command". This fixes it, yes?


This and Wine Merchant make a powerful combo. After you first play Wine Merchant, you get all the benefits of Wine Merchant for just $4 and you never have to underspend to get it back.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1070
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1404
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3813 on: October 17, 2019, 06:39:45 pm »
0

Charity
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Trash a card from your hand. Play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to $3 more than the trashed card, leaving it there.
I love trash-for-benefits.  This can trash Estates to play $5 cards which is nice.  Its ability to trash Coppers is strongly dependent on the quality of $3 Actions that appear: Is that limitation intentional?

Yes, it is intentional. If you were guaranteed some sort of cantrip ability every time you trashed a Copper, it would probably be too strong.

My Entry:




The first play of this will basically be ruined village, but it becomes strong when stacked.
In the second play it can be a Laboratory (Moat), in the third play it can be a Bustling Village (Village), in the fourth play it can be +3 Cards, +1 Action (Smithy), and from the sixth, it can be Goons with +Action! (Although Lost Arts are the easier way)
In first play, Ruined Library can also be used as a cantrip.

Another purpose is providing pseudo-villages in the kingdom with no village. Playing two successors as nothing-Perl Diver works like a Necropolis.

This looks extremely weak. Yes, the second play is a Lab (if Moat or Faithful Hound happen to be there) but the first play cancels out that effect completely. Then the Bustling Village effect is something you have to pay $9 and 3 Buys to get. If this is the only Village in the kingdom, I suspect playing Money will be more effective a lot if not most of the time.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2019, 06:48:05 pm by Commodore Chuckles »
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1218
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1254
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3814 on: October 17, 2019, 08:54:32 pm »
+1



Like Captain but both plays happen this turn. Has advantages and disadvantages over Captain, what do y'all think?
I like when he adds +1/+1 to all my Vampires. but uh also you've got some typos - Commander / non-Commander, lowercase supply. Still, seems about right pricewise, and like a decent card regardless.

Thanks, fixed
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

anordinaryman

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +84
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3815 on: October 18, 2019, 12:10:28 am »
+1


Quote
Developer - $4 - Action-Command
Trash a card from your hand. The player to your left names a cheaper and a more expensive non-Command Action card in the supply. Play both in either order, leaving them in the supply.

Imagine if Develop instead of gaining immediately played those cards. And they didn't have to cost exact $1 different. But throw in the fact that your opponent gets to choose which cards you play. This has to be the most bonkers splitter of all time. Yeah, you can play more than one terminal card with this, but you don't really get to choose what they are. Games where this is the only splitter/village are definitely going to be interesting. You do have some power -- In games with only non-terminal 2-costs (fishing village, pawn, etc), trashing a silver is guaranteed to be non-terminal. Of course, you do lose the silver.

It is intentional that you probably only get one action out of trashing a copper, and unless there are ruins, you only get one action out of trashing an estate -- but at least it's a 3-cost action or higher! You get a lot of milage out of trashing 4 costs, your opponent has to let you play a 5 cost or better. That's the big reason for this to cost 4. Also it's potentially incredibly strong in certain kingdoms and so I'd rather avoid the opening 2 of them.

The compelling reason this needs to be a command is to prevent the self-play of this which could cause you trash valuable cards in your hand. And to help prevent infinite loops with other Commands!

I anticipate that developer is a high-skill card to master. You have to purposefully position your deck such that the worst choice your opponent makes for you is still a good one. It's a fun little game-theory-esque challenge.
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +84
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3816 on: October 18, 2019, 12:27:52 am »
+2


My Entry:




The first play of this will basically be ruined village, but it becomes strong when stacked.
In the second play it can be a Laboratory (Moat), in the third play it can be a Bustling Village (Village), in the fourth play it can be +3 Cards, +1 Action (Smithy), and from the sixth, it can be Goons with +Action! (Although Lost Arts are the easier way)
In first play, Ruined Library can also be used as a cantrip.

Another purpose is providing pseudo-villages in the kingdom with no village. Playing two successors as nothing-Perl Diver works like a Necropolis.

This looks extremely weak. Yes, the second play is a Lab (if Moat or Faithful Hound happen to be there) but the first play cancels out that effect completely. Then the Bustling Village effect is something you have to pay $9 and 3 Buys to get. If this is the only Village in the kingdom, I suspect playing Money will be more effective a lot if not most of the time.
But it can turn any terminal into non-terminal, and that's pretty good. But yeah, you'll need low cost +cards or you discard your hand just playing successors. Or a draw-to-x could pair with these cards extremely well.

This concept is so cool. You can have a monolithic strategy that results in you playing almost all the cards in the supply. Dope! I wonder if you could strengthen it slightly to give +1 card if it's the first successor you have in play?

Falconer
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
The player to your left reveals a non-Command Action card from their hand (or reveals they can't). Choose one: +1 Card and +1 Action; or play the revealed card, leaving it there.
Delegate
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
Each other player reveals their hand. Play a revealed non-Command, non-Duration Action, leaving it there. If you couldn't, +2 Cards.
The old "play Actions from another player's hand" trick doesn't work very well because you stop if from working by not buying Actions, so the question is how you general combat a largely Treasure-centered strategy in the design of the card.
4est's Falconer gets around it by making it a cantrip instead of the worst Action in the player to your left's hand.  I think the limitation is huge.  If you play Falconer terminally they can reveal a terminal card the you can't play.  If you play Falconer non-terminally, they reveal a minimally useful non-terminal, again making Falconer of only marginal use.  I think a strong money-centric Strategy will make Falconer a waste of time.
Gubump's Delegate instead turns into a Moat instead of the best Action in any other player's hand.  Hitting anyone's any card means that this scales poorly into multiplayer.  The save of Moat is probably even worse than Falconer's cantrip, so I would likely still run good money against Delegate.
I recommend the catch for not having an Action to play be better than the Action play, honestly.  Me revealing an Action to your Command-card should make your Command card worse.

Fallbacks make these cards less interesting I think. What if instead of fall-backs, you made them more likely to hit? What about a militia first? Does the opponent kept their crappy action cards around for you to use or discard all their action cards? If so they have a bad turn. But if they leave their good action cards, well then oh no! Or you could make each opponent draw a card, choose an opponent to reveal their hand and you choose one. Just a few ways of making it not scale uncontrollably with multiple players and making it more interesting than adding a fall-back.
Make it cheaper/weaker and if it doesn't hit, it doesn't hit. Sometimes smugglers doesn't hit.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2019, 08:34:11 am by anordinaryman »
Logged

DEGwer

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Shuffle iT Username: DEGwer
  • Respect: +21
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3817 on: October 18, 2019, 08:33:19 am »
+3



Yes, it seems cooler to set it as if like it can always refer Ruined Library. Thank you for your advise. Now I made it easier to use. Of course, it remains strong with Poor House. It still doesn't break the balance even with Moat, does it?


My Entry:




The first play of this will basically be ruined village, but it becomes strong when stacked.
In the second play it can be a Laboratory (Moat), in the third play it can be a Bustling Village (Village), in the fourth play it can be +3 Cards, +1 Action (Smithy), and from the sixth, it can be Goons with +Action! (Although Lost Arts are the easier way)
In first play, Ruined Library can also be used as a cantrip.

Another purpose is providing pseudo-villages in the kingdom with no village. Playing two successors as nothing-Perl Diver works like a Necropolis.

This looks extremely weak. Yes, the second play is a Lab (if Moat or Faithful Hound happen to be there) but the first play cancels out that effect completely. Then the Bustling Village effect is something you have to pay $9 and 3 Buys to get. If this is the only Village in the kingdom, I suspect playing Money will be more effective a lot if not most of the time.
But it can turn any terminal into non-terminal, and that's pretty good. But yeah, you'll need low cost +cards or you discard your hand just playing successors. Or a draw-to-x could pair with these cards extremely well.

This concept is so cool. You can have a monolithic strategy that results in you playing almost all the cards in the supply. Dope! I wonder if you could strengthen it slightly to give +1 card if it's the first successor you have in play?

Logged

DEGwer

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Shuffle iT Username: DEGwer
  • Respect: +21
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3818 on: October 18, 2019, 09:00:50 am »
0


Traitor
$3 - Action - Command
The player to your right reveals their hand.
You may trash this. If you did, play a non-Command Action card from their hand, leaving it there.
If you didn't, +1 Action, +1 Buy
Heirloom: Bribe

Bribe
$3 - Treasure - Heirloom
$1
When you play this, gain a non-Treasure card costing up to $3

It cause the same infinite loops as General, which I posted above. Lurker accidentally kills all self-trashing Commands.

Bribe is very strong (it is often stronger than Gold because it works like +$4 and +1 Buy), but I think it is good card and does not break the balance because it is Heirloom. But it doesn't help Traitor much, because we can simply gain another useful Action.
Logged

grep

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
  • Respect: +101
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3819 on: October 18, 2019, 01:29:32 pm »
+1


Traitor
$3 - Action - Command
The player to your right reveals their hand.
You may trash this. If you did, play a non-Command Action card from their hand, leaving it there.
If you didn't, +1 Action, +1 Buy
Heirloom: Bribe

Bribe
$3 - Treasure - Heirloom
$1
When you play this, gain a non-Treasure card costing up to $3

It cause the same infinite loops as General, which I posted above. Lurker accidentally kills all self-trashing Commands.

Bribe is very strong (it is often stronger than Gold because it works like +$4 and +1 Buy), but I think it is good card and does not break the balance because it is Heirloom. But it doesn't help Traitor much, because we can simply gain another useful Action.
Thank you for the analysis.
Bribe might be very strong in presence of $2-3 cantrips, but most of the cheap cards are junk after saturation - so I think it's on par with Lucky Coin. A possible nerf is "Gain a non-Treasure card costing up to $3 that you don't have in play"
The loop can be broken with a "set aside" trick ("Set aside this. If you did, play.... At the end of your turn trash this")
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3820 on: October 18, 2019, 06:13:40 pm »
+3

General
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $4
Choose one: Trash this to play a non-Command non-Duration Action from the Supply, leaving it there; or play up to 2 differently named Actions you played this turn before you played this that are still in play.
General with +1 Card token will produce very simple infinite loop with Lurker.
Considering this is a minimum 3-card combo (General\Lurker\Teacher (you can get there with Pathfinding, but then you need more elements to make it do anything) with drawn deck (or Watchtower) to ensure the +1 Card draws the Lurked General), I'd hardly call it simple.  Once you have Teacher really, you can put the +1 Card and +1 Action onto the two piles and make Graverobber and Rogue work for this loop, too (though in Graverobber's case you need Priest, Tomb, Training, or Seaway also).
Corrected regardless.  General now trashes the card you target with it in addition to itself, so the described loop would empty the Lurker pile.
         
Delegate
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $3
Each other player reveals their hand. Play a revealed non-Command, non-Duration Action, leaving it there. If you couldn't, +2 Cards.
The old "play Actions from another player's hand" trick doesn't work very well because you stop if from working by not buying Actions, so the question is how you general combat a largely Treasure-centered strategy in the design of the card.
Gubump's Delegate instead turns into a Moat instead of the best Action in any other player's hand.  Hitting anyone's any card means that this scales poorly into multiplayer.  The save of Moat is probably even worse than Falconer's cantrip, so I would likely still run good money against Delegate.
I recommend the catch for not having an Action to play be better than the Action play, honestly.  Me revealing an Action to your Command-card should make your Command card worse.
I think that people will still buy Action cards just as much as normal even with Delegate/Falconer in the Kingdom (and my experience playtesting Delegate shows that this is true). A key thing that I don't think you're taking into account is that in order to play an opponent's Action with Delegate, you have to have a Delegate in hand while your opponent also has that Action in hand, whereas to play that same Action card, your opponent just needs to have it in hand. So overall, having the actual Action itself is still better than having a Delegate, and thus having Action cards is still well worth doing.
This is totally fair.  I don't think Delegate would push weak Treasure strategies to the front (I'm not going to run Smithy\BM simply because Delegate is present).  It runs the risk of making stronger money strategies more dominant when the failsafe of Delegate makes Delegate such a weak card.  A part of the problem I think comes in the players' headspace: Players tend to feel bad when other players piggyback off of them.  Based on this assistance aversion, the card would read healthier if copying other players' cards, strong as it may be, was blocking something that was stronger still.
For example, I had initially considered a design as follows:
Quote
The player to your left reveals their hand. If they reveal any non-Command, non-Duration Actions, you may play one of them, leaving it there. Otherwise, you may play a non-Command, non-Duration Action from the Supply, leaving it there.
*TODO: Buy restriction to reduce opening with this*
So that players would want to have Actions to stop it from being its best version.  It wouldn't even need such a stark contrast between its stronger and weaker versions: If Delegate missing was a Laboratory then it would be totally reasonable in the opening and players would feel good when they "block" it with a <$4-cost Action.  It is probably fine regardless.  Don't mind me.

Assembly
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $5
You may play a non-Command Action card from your hand. Then, if you did, play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to the cost of that Action card, leaving it there.
Does this really need the Command limitation for the play from hand?  Assembly->Assembly doesn't sound crazy.  In most cases, this is +2 Actions attached to a mildly worse Band of Misfits.  If you play a $5 card from your hand with Assembly, your Assembly is a Band of Misfits played without spending an +action.  If you only have $4 Actions to play with it, you can only Band of Misfits $3 Actions.

Lieutenant
Types: Action, Commander
Cost: $6
Choose a non-Command Action card in the Supply costing up to $4. Play it twice, leaving it there.
I think Lieutenant is significantly stronger than Captain, even ignoring that it can play Duration cards. We can argue regarding the strength of 2 plays now versus 1 play at the start of your turn, but Captain misses the shuffle where Lieutenant doesn't.
Logged
Dominion: Greed 1.0, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +966
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3821 on: October 18, 2019, 06:43:48 pm »
+1

Assembly
Types: Action, Command
Cost: $5
You may play a non-Command Action card from your hand. Then, if you did, play a non-Command Action card from the Supply costing up to the cost of that Action card, leaving it there.
Does this really need the Command limitation for the play from hand?  Assembly->Assembly doesn't sound crazy.  In most cases, this is +2 Actions attached to a mildly worse Band of Misfits.  If you play a $5 card from your hand with Assembly, your Assembly is a Band of Misfits played without spending an +action.  If you only have $4 Actions to play with it, you can only Band of Misfits $3 Actions.

I'm not sure whether it would be broken with anything if it didn't have the non-Command clause, I didn't really put much thought into it to be honest. It seemed wise to me to have it there so it won't become problematic though. I think you're misunderstanding the card, in the context of Dominion up to $X includes $X. So if you play a $5 with Assembly you can play any card in the Supply costing $5 or less, including another copy of the card you played.
Logged

majiponi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 548
  • Respect: +449
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3822 on: October 19, 2019, 06:52:58 pm »
0

Oh nice. This was my first alternate for last week anyway.







Quote
Practise $3 Event
Play a non-Command, non-Duration Action card whose cost is $4 or less from the Supply, leaving it there. Take the Bow or the Rosin.
Quote
Bow Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play a card whose cost is $5 or less instead.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)
Quote
Rosin Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play the selected card twice, leaving it in the Supply.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)



Notes:
  • Bow lets you bypass Potion costs. This is intentional. cleaner to get rid of this and fix the "play debt cards for free"
  • Rosin probably doesn't need the reminder text Rosin now actually uses its reminder text
  • Practise now can't play Duration cards, because the tracking on that would be a mess.

Big shout-out to Fragasnap for making me think what an event/command card would look like, and to Gubump + scolapasta for reminding me that: Hey Debt exists and you should probably fix this.

In my dreams, I have a Plan, if I got me Wine Merchant ah, I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd Fool around and have a Ball...

Too easy to loop.
Logged

Commodore Chuckles

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1070
  • Shuffle iT Username: Commodore Chuckles
  • Respect: +1404
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3823 on: October 19, 2019, 08:56:54 pm »
0



Yes, it seems cooler to set it as if like it can always refer Ruined Library. Thank you for your advise. Now I made it easier to use. Of course, it remains strong with Poor House. It still doesn't break the balance even with Moat, does it?

Yes, this looks much more usable now. And no, it isn't broken at all with Moat, because you'd $6, 2 Buys and collision to get the Lab effect, whereas Lab itself is only $5 and 1 Buy.
Logged

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #3824 on: October 19, 2019, 10:01:03 pm »
0

Oh nice. This was my first alternate for last week anyway.







Quote
Practise $3 Event
Play a non-Command, non-Duration Action card whose cost is $4 or less from the Supply, leaving it there. Take the Bow or the Rosin.
Quote
Bow Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play a card whose cost is $5 or less instead.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)
Quote
Rosin Artifact
At the start of your turn, +1 Buy. When you buy Practise, you may play the selected card twice, leaving it in the Supply.
(Follow all other restrictions on Practise)



Notes:
  • Bow lets you bypass Potion costs. This is intentional. cleaner to get rid of this and fix the "play debt cards for free"
  • Rosin probably doesn't need the reminder text Rosin now actually uses its reminder text
  • Practise now can't play Duration cards, because the tracking on that would be a mess.

Big shout-out to Fragasnap for making me think what an event/command card would look like, and to Gubump + scolapasta for reminding me that: Hey Debt exists and you should probably fix this.

In my dreams, I have a Plan, if I got me Wine Merchant ah, I wouldn't have to work at all, I'd Fool around and have a Ball...

Too easy to loop.

i'm not following what you're saying here
Pages: 1 ... 151 152 [153] 154 155 ... 197  All
 

Page created in 0.137 seconds with 21 queries.