Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 163 164 [165] 166 167 ... 195  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 184248 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5425
  • Respect: +2805
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4100 on: November 20, 2019, 08:02:03 pm »
0

I'm misreading Metropolis somehow I guess, if Fortune is revealed by Gladiator in a 10 action game, I thought the cost of Metropolis would drop from 7$ to 6$.

Similarly with that interpretation the probability of having 6 treasure cards in the same kingdom is so low that the minimum value rule wouldn't be worth the text space.

I tried reading it as the value of the treasure on top then tried reading it the number of treasure cards that aren't covered up except covering up treasures with treasures doesn't matter, I've tried everything, can't get the same numbers.
Logged

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 719
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +965
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4101 on: November 20, 2019, 08:35:16 pm »
+3



So obviously there's a huge gulf in power between the strongest and weakest combinations (my votes go to Encampment+Experiment and Poor House+Beggar) so this isn't trying to be balanced 100% of the time. I think 3P is a good price for the average case and the Potion at least somewhat tempers the most absurd combinations. It's possible that it should be limited to terminal Actions only to make it a bit more consistent but that isn't nearly as cool.
Logged

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 451
  • Respect: +258
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4102 on: November 20, 2019, 11:24:04 pm »
0



So obviously there's a huge gulf in power between the strongest and weakest combinations (my votes go to Encampment+Experiment and Poor House+Beggar) so this isn't trying to be balanced 100% of the time. I think 3P is a good price for the average case and the Potion at least somewhat tempers the most absurd combinations. It's possible that it should be limited to terminal Actions only to make it a bit more consistent but that isn't nearly as cool.

I've always been unsure what "unused" actually means in Dominion. Is it cards not in the Kingdom or is it cards not in that game. The former (and what I believe Black Market suggest) means you could choose the same card twice. Not so much a big deal, just curious what your interpretation is.

Also, I believe it is "your mat" and not "the mat".
Logged

Gubump

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 720
  • Respect: +437
    • View Profile
Re: Contest #52: Varying effect per-game
« Reply #4103 on: November 21, 2019, 12:27:19 am »
+2



FAQ:
- During a turn in which a Travelling Shop was played, all cards in the Item piles are considered to be in the Supply, and as a result can be gained by cards like Workshop and Altar (provided they fit all other restrictions, e.g. cost), not just bought.
- Items with "return this to the Supply" will be returned from the pile if and only if you also played a Travelling Shop earlier in the turn.
- You can use Teacher to move your tokens to an Item pile as long as you played a Travelling Shop (with e.g. Prince) before calling it. Likewise, you can also use Events to move your tokens to Item piles as long as you played a Travelling Shop before buying said Event. You can move Adventures tokens off of Item piles even if they are not in the Supply.
- Item piles do not count towards the game end conditions, even during a turn in which a Travelling Shop was played.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Violet CLM and his Dominion Card Image Generator.

forkofnature

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Contest #52: Varying effect per-game
« Reply #4104 on: November 21, 2019, 12:40:20 am »
0



FAQ:
- During a turn in which a Travelling Shop was played, all cards in the Item piles are considered to be in the Supply, and as a result can be gained by cards like Workshop and Altar (provided they fit all other restrictions, e.g. cost), not just bought.
- Items with "return this to the Supply" will be returned from the pile if and only if you also played a Travelling Shop earlier in the turn.
- You can use Teacher to move your tokens to an Item pile as long as you played a Travelling Shop (with e.g. Prince) before calling it. Likewise, you can also use Events to move your tokens to Item piles as long as you played a Travelling Shop before buying said Event. You can move Adventures tokens off of Item piles even if they are not in the Supply.
- Item piles do not count towards the game end conditions, even during a turn in which a Travelling Shop was played.

This is neat: being able to shell out for access to a bigger kingdom sounds fun. However, I wonder (a) whether this is all that different from Black Market, (b) why the cost restriction is necessary, and (c) whether this might work better as a Project, which would also address question (a).
Logged

Gazbag

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 719
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gazbag
  • Respect: +965
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4105 on: November 21, 2019, 08:33:53 am »
+1



So obviously there's a huge gulf in power between the strongest and weakest combinations (my votes go to Encampment+Experiment and Poor House+Beggar) so this isn't trying to be balanced 100% of the time. I think 3P is a good price for the average case and the Potion at least somewhat tempers the most absurd combinations. It's possible that it should be limited to terminal Actions only to make it a bit more consistent but that isn't nearly as cool.

I've always been unsure what "unused" actually means in Dominion. Is it cards not in the Kingdom or is it cards not in that game. The former (and what I believe Black Market suggest) means you could choose the same card twice. Not so much a big deal, just curious what your interpretation is.

Also, I believe it is "your mat" and not "the mat".

I probably should have specified Kingdom cards, the intent is that it's two different cards. To me that's more of a rule book/faq clarification thing because the Black Market rules have always been more of a do what you like thing. There is only one mat so it is "the mat".
Logged

Aquila

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +258
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4106 on: November 21, 2019, 09:04:56 am »
+2



Put simply, a Villain variant with a silly name that varies in power each game, targeting a specific price point that's guaranteed to be there (even if only the Henchman is at it). The stronger it is, the more expensive it is.
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4107 on: November 21, 2019, 01:10:32 pm »
+5

Sleepwalker
$2
Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Dream card. Discard the other revealed cards, then play the Dream card.
--
Setup: Choose 3 random non-Attack Action Supply piles other than Sleepwalker. Action cards from those piles are Dream cards.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 09:00:38 pm by Something_Smart »
Logged

mandioca15

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Respect: +40
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4108 on: November 21, 2019, 04:04:27 pm »
+1

Crusade (Victory, $4)

Worth 1VP per 3 Attack cards you have.

Setup: Choose three additional non-Attack Action piles to add to the Kingdom; one costing $2, one costing $3 and one costing $4.
Cards from these piles gain the Attack type and the following additional text at the end of the card: 'Each other player discards down to 4 cards unless they can reveal a copy of this card. If any player does, trash both copies of the card.'

Alt-VP cards are interesting, so I thought I'd try this variant with Attack cards. It adds additional Attack cards to the Kingdom to make itself more worthwhile.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5425
  • Respect: +2805
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4109 on: November 21, 2019, 06:34:10 pm »
0

Travelling Shop violates the "can't beats can" golden rule generally used for interpreting board game rules.  One way of getting around the rule is using "as though" wording the way MtG sometimes does.
There's no clarity issue with the card with regards to figuring out what it's -supposed- to do but it's a little less jarring to read cards if they're technically worded on point.
Really though, it seems like adding four cards to the Kingdom, which generally has the purpose of adding those cards to the supply, then immediately turning around and saying those cards aren't in the supply, isn't how you want to do it anyway.  It'd make more sense to me to say "Setup: Designate four unused Kingdom card piles costing 3$-5$ as Item piles."  You can tell people that it's foolish not to pull them out of the box in the rulebook, that's pretty fair game since Bard, Tournament, and Bandit Camp are also cards that have to resort to telling people it's foolish not to pull them out of the box in advance in the rulebook.
Alternatively you could do "Setup: Add four Kingdom card piles costing 3$-5$ to the Kingdom without adding them to the Supply", which is kind of what you meant, the "they aren't in the supply" seems intended as a modifier but is actually going to function as a standalone rule when you put it in a separate sentence like that.

This technical nitpicking has led me to a funny realization : since you -are- adding these cards to the supply, unlike several other fan Black Markets you can 3 pile using the Item piles.  If one player does the Item thing and the other doesn't, it's possible for the player going for Items to gain unilateral control over when the game 3-piles.  I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing, it seems really interesting, I doubt it will be overbearingly powerful coming from halfwoodcutter.
Logged

FlyerBeast

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Shuffle iT Username: FlyerBeast
  • Wide and Torturous
  • Respect: +36
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4110 on: November 21, 2019, 07:13:49 pm »
0

Sleepwalker
$2
Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Dream card. Discard the other revealed cards, then play the Dream card.
--
Setup: Choose 3 random Action Supply piles other than Sleepwalker. Action cards from those piles are Dream cards.
So, you could have Goons as a Dream card and reliably play it every time you have another card costing $2 in your hand? You know what, that sounds fun!
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4111 on: November 21, 2019, 07:42:46 pm »
0

That was the intention, yes. There are probably some Dream cards that make this abusable but I don't expect it to get that bad. Even in the Goons case, you're gonna run out of Sleepwalkers to buy before too long, and you're gonna be drawing them dead, and spamming Sleepwalkers is probably beatable by one method or another.

If you think there are some actions that are a bit nuts for this (KC comes to mind, though I'm fairly sure a dream-KC game would be super fun), I could put a cost and/or non-attack restriction on it. I definitely want to allow $5's but maybe I could ban $6's and higher.

It also just occurred to me how funny it would be to have Sleepwalkers and Golems constantly finding each other. I don't think that's a bad thing, though.
Logged

forkofnature

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4112 on: November 21, 2019, 07:57:11 pm »
0

That was the intention, yes. There are probably some Dream cards that make this abusable but I don't expect it to get that bad. Even in the Goons case, you're gonna run out of Sleepwalkers to buy before too long, and you're gonna be drawing them dead, and spamming Sleepwalkers is probably beatable by one method or another.

If you think there are some actions that are a bit nuts for this (KC comes to mind, though I'm fairly sure a dream-KC game would be super fun), I could put a cost and/or non-attack restriction on it. I definitely want to allow $5's but maybe I could ban $6's and higher.

It also just occurred to me how funny it would be to have Sleepwalkers and Golems constantly finding each other. I don't think that's a bad thing, though.

I think the thing to do is probably specify non-attack. In the case of Goons (or even weaker things like Militia), the first player to land an attack is going to hardcore snowball since your opponent is basically playing with three-card hands from then on.
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4113 on: November 21, 2019, 09:00:17 pm »
0

Yeah, you're probably right. It can be spammable in a lot of cases but the non-attack cases seem like they'd be a lot more fun than the attack cases.
Logged

popsofctown

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5425
  • Respect: +2805
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4114 on: November 21, 2019, 09:18:50 pm »
0

Sleepwalker
$2
Action
Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal a Dream card. Discard the other revealed cards, then play the Dream card.
--
Setup: Choose 3 random Action Supply piles other than Sleepwalker. Action cards from those piles are Dream cards.
So, you could have Goons as a Dream card and reliably play it every time you have another card costing $2 in your hand? You know what, that sounds fun!
I kind of am tempted to think getting knocked from 6$ to 4$ by Goons and having to buy Silver is a lot more devastating than getting knocked from 6$ to 4$ by Goons and buying Dream, which is almost as good as Goons.  Wouldn't that be less swing, not more?
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4115 on: November 21, 2019, 11:16:09 pm »
0

I mean the issue is if one person has Goons and is playing it with Sleepwalker every turn and the other person can't get to $6 to even get a Goons in the first place.

But honestly I think there are attacks that are more degenerate than Goons to be playing every turn, such as Mountebank or the Knights. While I don't think those games would necessarily be unbalanced they would probably not be very fun.
Logged

forkofnature

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +24
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4116 on: November 21, 2019, 11:44:07 pm »
0

I mean the issue is if one person has Goons and is playing it with Sleepwalker every turn and the other person can't get to $6 to even get a Goons in the first place.

But honestly I think there are attacks that are more degenerate than Goons to be playing every turn, such as Mountebank or the Knights. While I don't think those games would necessarily be unbalanced they would probably not be very fun.

Yeah, that kind of lock is the main problem. Mountebank doesn't have immediate impact and loses effectiveness eventually. Goons, Militia, Ghost Ship, Knights, etc. are strong all game. I remember a game where I managed to streamline pretty early down to a deck mostly composed of a lot of Fishing Villages and Pirate Ships. My opponent couldn't really do anything for the rest of the game. Not all that enjoyable.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2019, 11:56:51 pm by forkofnature »
Logged

herw

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 150
  • Shuffle iT Username: Dominion-online: herw (basic account) and Herwig (Gold)
  • Respect: +57
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4117 on: November 22, 2019, 12:44:18 am »
+2

Logged

segura

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 453
  • Respect: +184
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4118 on: November 22, 2019, 01:19:47 am »
0

I mean the issue is if one person has Goons and is playing it with Sleepwalker every turn and the other person can't get to $6 to even get a Goons in the first place.

But honestly I think there are attacks that are more degenerate than Goons to be playing every turn, such as Mountebank or the Knights. While I don't think those games would necessarily be unbalanced they would probably not be very fun.
That has less to do with Sleepwalker being too strong but with Mountebank and Goons being too strong and centralizing.

Sleepwalker is at best a target-draw Sage and at worst a dead card. The latter is a serious downside.
Logged

Joseph2302

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 853
  • Shuffle iT Username: Joseph2302
  • "Better to be lucky than good"
  • Respect: +569
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4119 on: November 22, 2019, 08:34:23 am »
0

I mean the issue is if one person has Goons and is playing it with Sleepwalker every turn and the other person can't get to $6 to even get a Goons in the first place.

But honestly I think there are attacks that are more degenerate than Goons to be playing every turn, such as Mountebank or the Knights. While I don't think those games would necessarily be unbalanced they would probably not be very fun.
That has less to do with Sleepwalker being too strong but with Mountebank and Goons being too strong and centralizing.

Sleepwalker is at best a target-draw Sage and at worst a dead card. The latter is a serious downside.
Attack cards can't have Dream tokens, so that wouldn't be a problem
Logged
Mafia Stats: (correct as of 2017)
Town: 22 games, 8 wins
Scum: 5 games, 3 wins

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4120 on: November 22, 2019, 09:42:15 am »
0

Well yeah, we were discussing whether that restriction is a good idea.

I think it is. There are plenty of actions that are fun to play every turn in a way that doesn't make your opponent's life miserable.
Logged

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +205
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4121 on: November 22, 2019, 09:55:37 am »
+1

I went with trying to make the hypothetical hex-druid in a way that doesn't ruin everyone's game via spamming Deluded/Envious


Quote
Warlock $5 Action - Attack - Doom
+ $2
Choose one: each other player receives one of the set aside face-up Hexes, then flip it face-down; or flip one of the set-aside face-down Hexes face up and +$1.
(You may look at the face-down Hexes at any time)
-
Setup: place 3 Hexes face up, set aside.

Borrows a little from Necromancer too.

v1, for posterity:
« Last Edit: November 26, 2019, 08:58:40 am by spineflu »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
  • Respect: +541
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4122 on: November 22, 2019, 10:32:58 am »
+2


Quote
Gang
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. You may play an Initiate card from your hand.
Setup: Choose a different random Action Supply pile. Cards from that pile are Initiate cards.
Notes: Gang can't choose itself. If it is the only Action Supply pile, it fails to choose one.

Conditional super Laboratory variant. Compare to Stables, which has you discard a much more common Treasure card, this lets you chain into a specific card.  It's only "non-terminal" if it chooses a non-terminal card, though.  When it chooses a cheap card you can possibly rely on it.  If it chooses a big $5+ card, it will be harder to proc, so maybe would be better at +2 Cards costed $3.  I don't know that I like how much +2 Cards tastes like Cultist.  What do you think?
« Last Edit: November 22, 2019, 11:56:32 am by Fragasnap »
Logged
Dominion: Greed 1.0, my fan expansion with "in-games-using-this" cards

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +205
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4123 on: November 22, 2019, 10:41:18 am »
+1

@Fragasnap: is it a gang or a cabal? it's different in the photo + the text versions.

I think it's probably a bit much to have at $5. +2 Cards, +$1 feels like maybe a better middle ground between Cultist and Smithy. Or like +3 Cards, discard one.
« Last Edit: November 22, 2019, 11:29:53 am by spineflu »
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 61
  • Respect: +62
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4124 on: November 22, 2019, 02:15:12 pm »
+1

Logged
Pages: 1 ... 163 164 [165] 166 167 ... 195  All
 

Page created in 0.205 seconds with 21 queries.