Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 188 189 [190] 191 192 ... 196  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest Thread  (Read 187025 times)

1 Member and 13 Guests are viewing this topic.

somekindoftony

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
  • Respect: +39
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4725 on: February 11, 2020, 05:09:55 pm »
+1

Not seeing what the Swindler interaction is.

Obviously by Swindler I meant Ambassador. All the cool kids are using Swindler to mean Ambassador now.  :)
Logged

[TP] Inferno

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 76
  • I have no +Buys :(
  • Respect: +68
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4726 on: February 11, 2020, 10:58:38 pm »
0

Not seeing what the Swindler interaction is.

Obviously by Swindler I meant Ambassador. All the cool kids are using Swindler to mean Ambassador now.  :)
Hmm... yes. Lemme just uh... Swindle you a Colony for the win.
Logged
Counting House is the best card in the game. Change my mind.

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4727 on: February 11, 2020, 11:35:48 pm »
0

I also just thought of a different problem. Cards like swindler. And anything that returns things to the supply. In my head they returned their cards to beneath the face down top card. That isn't intuitive at all. 
Man, aiming for a simple new mechanic is hard.

I think that's a reasonable implication - have it be empty for all purposes except game end. Makes City better, for sure.
As far as returning things to the supply, have an errata/FAQ for the card that returned-to-the-supply stuff goes to the bottom of the pile?

Or, change Blockade so it flips the whole supply pile - cards being returned go face-up on top of the pile, and are available to be bought, and that pile is no longer blockaded until someone buys the available cards.

Not seeing what the Swindler interaction is.


What if a card attempting to return to a blockaded pile is trashed? (I also was going to suggest that it goes back to where it came from, but that might still be weird for cards like encampment or experiment)

I know later you said you mean Ambassador, but I do think Swindler could be an issue, in that Blockade does strengthen it. Normally, when you swindle a Province with no other $8 pile, you have to give back a Province, whereas if it's Blockaded, you can't. (so they would get nothing?). Obviously, it's not a mechanics concern, but it does make this a very "random" combo.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4728 on: February 12, 2020, 12:07:07 am »
0

i mean, if you flip the whole pile, then return a card face-up, if you blockade the pile again, it stays un-blockaded bc the bottom card-stack is face-up.

but yeah, Swindler on blockaded Provinces (and no Princes) is problemy. Indicator that Blockade should only hit Kingdom cards, prolly.

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4729 on: February 12, 2020, 12:22:26 am »
+2

Sorry, maybe it wasn't clear, I was suggesting that the rule could be "If a card attempts to return to a supply pile that is blockaded, it can't and is trashed instead."
« Last Edit: February 12, 2020, 02:40:44 am by scolapasta »
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4730 on: February 12, 2020, 07:07:19 am »
0

maybe it should be like getting an experiment from the black market - it tries to return to its pile, but can't, and so you keep it.

X-tra

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4731 on: February 12, 2020, 09:21:03 am »
0

I’m doing a round of correction to my custom Strength game mechanic. After a couple of tests, it was apparent to me that Strength warmongers had it a little bit too easy to fully trigger powerful cards. This is because other players trying to prevent the active player to fully power his or her Strength card could only do so with 5 cards in hand. If the active player buys a lot of +Cards, +Actions cards, then their odds of successfully triggering their Strength cards in their entirety was ridiculously high. Nothing other players could do to deter that, even if they had a deck loaded with cards. And then, having successfully played, say, a Strategic Village, the active player could then continue to play Strength card after Strength card, knowing they wouldn't be stopped, having the best time of their life.

No, I say. Dominion is supposed to make you weep. And weep you shall! The rules about comparing your amount of against other players’ therefore now goes as follow:

“First, this comparison happens IMMEDIATELY when you play a Strength card. Do whatever the card says and then, when you reach the “If most ” part, you do the comparison. Each Strength card in play from THE ACTIVE PLAYER have their added up. This is the ACTIVE PLAYER’S TOTAL. Then, each OTHER PLAYER, starting from the left of the active player and going clockwise, may or may not reveal additional Strength cards from their hand. This number is not limited, players may reveal any number of Strength cards from their hand. These other players then add up all of their own revealed , and this is their own total.”

Again, the moment some else matches or surpasses your number of , then you fail the “if most ” condition. The bolded parts above are highlighting what changed in that rule. So, in a nutshell, only other players can reveal Strength card from their hand. The active player only has whatever he or she has in play at that moment to compare. This simple subtelty creates two beautiful effects:

  • It is harder for the active player to reap the benefits of a Strength card. A more meticulous way to go about Strength cards must now be employed.
  • Downtime is reduced. The active player’s hand size and their Strength cards with conditional values changes constantly during their turn. Recalculating their total amount of from their hand each time was a little tedious. No more of that. Other players’ total amount of is static. Therefore, it is way easier to calculate everything with this rule change.

I know balance was not that much of an important criteria for this week's challenge, but dangit if some of my cards need it. So here's some that I change:




   
Flamethrowers (Action – Attack – Strength)
If most : +2 Cards. You may trash
up to 5 cards from your hand. Each
other player with 5 or more cards
reveal their hand and you may discard
1 of their cards costing or less.

2
Flamethrowers was bonkers before! 3 on a single card is just too much. It should never get that overpowered. Especially if you’re the first one to afford one. This is how you nullify your competition, pretty much. So now it is worth 2 . Secondly, you can now trash up to 5, not 6. Small change, but eh. Finally, it doesn’t trash a card of your choice from your opponents’ hands costing up to anymore, it discards it. Still mean, but it’s not a deck killer at least.


   
Trenches (Action – Reaction – Strength)
Discard 1 card and +2 Cards.

When another player plays an Attack card,
you may reveal this once, after the Attack.
If most : +2 Cards.

2
Trenches simply doesn’t make you discard anymore when you use it as a Reaction. Why would you want to actively hurt yourself when Reacting is supposed to help you? Isn’t the Attack you’re Reacting to enough?


   
Strategic Village (Action – Strength)
+1 Card
If most : +2 Actions,
+1 Buy and +

Worth 1 if this is in play.
Otherwise, worth 2
It is now a riskier Village. I changed this because chaining these was too easy. Besides, it’s more thematically coherent now. This village represents a bastion of safety. Thus, using it as a sort of “defense” against someone who’s doing a display of strength should be what Strategic Village tries to accomplish. And now it does. It is weaker in play than it is in hand. Other players can block your little engine with less trouble with this new version.


   
Gunpowder Barrel (Action – Reserve – Strength)
+1 Action
Put this on your Tavern mat.

At the start of your turn, you may call
this.
If most : +

Worth 1 per Gunpowder Barrel on
your Tavern mat.
This, a cantrip? No. Suffered the “it was too easy to get there” syndrome, again. So now it just does “+1 Action” before being put on your Tavern Mat.


   
Archers (Action – Attack – Duration – Strength)
Choose: +1 Card; or +
You may discard any
number of Palisades, each
for + .
If most : Each other
player has – until the start
of your next turn.
And then, we have Archers, again. I mentioned in my original post that I was the most unsure about this card. I still am. But this looks... better, now? Discarding Palisades will give you your money, but will drive you further away from the Attack part. And you have the choice of +1 Card or + . Choices, man.


   
Palisade (Action – Strength)
+1 Card
+1 Action
When you buy this, you may trash a
card from your hand.

Worth 1 if you have another
Palisade in play. Otherwise,
worth 2 .
Hey, speaking of Palisades. Now, it goes like this: You play a Palisade. Congrats, you have 2 . Now you play another one. Your total is still 2. Because they are now worth 1 each. Other people’s Palisades are still packing their full 2 punch. And this is what Palisades should do: Be used more as a defense than as an attack. This new scaling is pretty neat, I think.


   
Plunderer (Action – Strength)
+1 Card
+1 Action
If most : Choose up to 2: + ; or
trash 1 card from your hand; or gain
a card costing up to .

Worth 1 if there is another
Plunderer in play, or worth 1 if
the turn isn’t yours.
He had a hard time, so now, if this is catharsis enough, he can pick up to 2 things in the list of things he can do. Trivially superior to what it was before, in my opinion.



I will edit my original post soon enough. Hopefully things are a little more on track now!
« Last Edit: February 12, 2020, 12:01:20 pm by X-tra »
Logged

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4732 on: February 12, 2020, 10:45:17 am »
+1

What if a card attempting to return to a blockaded pile is trashed? (I also was going to suggest that it goes back to where it came from, but that might still be weird for cards like encampment or experiment)

maybe it should be like getting an experiment from the black market - it tries to return to its pile, but can't, and so you keep it.

Right, that was my second suggestion, I was just worried about cards like Experiment and Encampment. But you're absolutely right, there are rules for these cards with Black Market that already suggest a solution.

For encampment:
Quote
If you cannot return Encampment to the Supply (e.g. you bought it from the Black Market), then if it is set aside it will stay there but will still count as one of your cards at the end of the game.

So I think either trashing the card or following Black Market like rules both seem more intuitive that putting back on the pile in some way. Really depends on if you want Blockades to be stronger (trash) or weaker (BM rules) against these types of cards.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +261
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4733 on: February 12, 2020, 06:14:08 pm »
+6

Challenge 61: Create a New Simple Mechanic Submission:

First of all, I'm not sure this submission qualifies as it adds an extra game setup step. If it doesn't I'm happy to remove it!

Leader Cards: These play exactly like Projects. The big difference is each player may chooses one and only one Leader for free before the start of the game. All Leaders are available to be chosen and they are not pile limited (so multiple players may choose the same Leader). All Leaders provide a benefit, but beware, all Leaders also have drawbacks. If the Kingdom lacks an extra Action, the Industrious Leader might look appealing, but all non-terminal Actions will cost you $1 extra for the whole game!

   
   

These may not be exactly balanced, but again these are just to highlight the concept. Thanks for looking!


Challenge 61: Create a New Simple Mechanic Submission:
Industrious: At the start of your turn, +1 Action. During your turns, cards with +Action amounts in their text cost $1 more.

Devout: During your turns, once per phase, when you discard a card (from anywhere), you may trash it. At the end of each turn you trashed any cards with this, each other player gets +1VP.

Political: During your turns, Victory cards cost $1 more. When you gain a Victory card, +1VP.

Tactical: At the start of the game, take 9debt. At the start of your turn, +$1.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2020, 06:22:39 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Shuffle iT Username: S_Smart
  • Respect: +64
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4734 on: February 13, 2020, 02:09:12 am »
+3

Enchantments

Enchantments are a new card type.

When you gain a card, you may optionally enchant it with an Enchantment card in your hand or one that you have in play. You may only enchant each gained card once. Some Enchantments might have restrictions what cards they can enchant.

When you enchant a card, immediately set aside the Enchantment card along with the card being enchanted. Both cards will remain there for the rest of the game, and the Enchantment will provide some permanent effect based on the card enchanted. Neither the Enchantment nor the card enchanted is considered in play. Return them to your deck at the end of the game.

Enchantment/card combos do not stack; you may set an Enchantment aside with a card if you already have a copy of that Enchantment set aside with a copy of that card, but it will have no effect.


« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 12:58:08 am by Something_Smart »
Logged

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4735 on: February 13, 2020, 03:57:10 am »
0

Enchantments

Enchantments are a new card type.

When you gain a card, you may optionally enchant it with an Enchantment card in your hand or one that you have in play. You may only enchant each gained card once. Some Enchantments might have restrictions what cards they can enchant.

When you enchant a card, immediately set aside the Enchantment card along with the card being enchanted. Both cards will remain there for the rest of the game, and the Enchantment will provide some permanent effect based on the card enchanted. Neither the Enchantment nor the card enchanted is considered in play.


both the enchantment & the gained card are still in your deck?
and do you gain an additional copy of it to mske up for the set-aside one?

somekindoftony

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 72
  • Respect: +39
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4736 on: February 13, 2020, 08:24:47 am »
0

Posting this in case I miss the deadline.




 Also Kudasai those Leader cards are fun. I want to choose Tactical which is perhaps why I'm actually seldom winning my games.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 05:33:01 pm by somekindoftony »
Logged

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Shuffle iT Username: S_Smart
  • Respect: +64
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4737 on: February 13, 2020, 10:35:48 am »
+1

both the enchantment & the gained card are still in your deck?
Yes.
Quote
and do you gain an additional copy of it to mske up for the set-aside one?
No, the idea was that you don't gain another copy. If you did, I think they'd be too similar to the token Events or Projects.

They're supposed to be slow but powerful; if you think any of them are too weak, the feedback would be welcome. Keystone does seem a little weak in retrospect, maybe it should be allowed to target any card rather than just Treasures.
Logged

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4738 on: February 13, 2020, 10:42:52 am »
0

both the enchantment & the gained card are still in your deck?
Yes.
Quote
and do you gain an additional copy of it to mske up for the set-aside one?
No, the idea was that you don't gain another copy. If you did, I think they'd be too similar to the token Events or Projects.

They're supposed to be slow but powerful; if you think any of them are too weak, the feedback would be welcome. Keystone does seem a little weak in retrospect, maybe it should be allowed to target any card rather than just Treasures.

i mean, you gotta buy the card you're enchanting twice to get the benefit of it, which is non-trivial (tempo-wise) with, say, Prince or Expand, but automatic with Experiment or Port.

segura

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 457
  • Respect: +187
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4739 on: February 13, 2020, 12:44:07 pm »
0

both the enchantment & the gained card are still in your deck?
Yes.
Quote
and do you gain an additional copy of it to mske up for the set-aside one?
No, the idea was that you don't gain another copy. If you did, I think they'd be too similar to the token Events or Projects.

They're supposed to be slow but powerful; if you think any of them are too weak, the feedback would be welcome. Keystone does seem a little weak in retrospect, maybe it should be allowed to target any card rather than just Treasures.
Keystone is extremely weak; it only makes sense in overdrawing deck and to Coin-ify Potion.
I like the general idea quite a bit but like spineflu I worry that this is too weak. For example Future Sight looks at first pretty sweet, now those Mountebanks stop being terminal Silvers and draw. Great stuff! Then you realize that you gotta quasi-trash two $5s to do so and realize that this price is too large.
Logged

Snowyowl

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4740 on: February 13, 2020, 02:43:55 pm »
0

Keystone's kinda interesting, if you put it on Copper then you'll have 1 less card in hand each turn. So you can draw an extra with draw-to-X effects. Which you conveniently have, as Keystone is one.

.. still kinda weak even then, paying 4 for an effective draw-to-6 sometimes is not that interesting, even if it does cantrip.
Logged

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4741 on: February 13, 2020, 03:13:26 pm »
+2

So, (probable) final updates to Jewelry cards.

First, some cosmetic changes - I decided to give them a different, brighter color than regular treasure. And I had forgotten the top corner amounts in the original versions.

Other changes / comments:

Ring - stays the same; demonstrates cards that will encourage spending more buys
Bracelet - changed cost from $4 to $5; demonstrates cards that care about other cards you bought
Necklace - while I liked the idea of a self contraband, but this seemed too limiting (and the wording was awkward). So now it only self-contrabands if you play before buying and you can still buy cards up to 5.



And I've added a new card, Earrings: a treasure card that (effectively) produces $4 per turn; however it does this by making you gain a silver and first make a buy (so either you have to split your $ for multiple good buys OR buy a copper; i.e. you get $4 to spend, but gain a copper and a silver)



I'm also adding this blurb to the original post:

Ring - uses mechanic to encourage spending more buys
Bracelet - uses mechanic to care about other cards you bought
Necklace - uses mechanic to limit buy power of the card
Earrings - uses mechanic to interact with other cards that draw after you buy (and limits buy power of the card)
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 03:27:55 pm by scolapasta »
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

spineflu

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 412
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • +1 Coffers, +1 Respect
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4742 on: February 13, 2020, 03:16:49 pm »
0

we at 24 hours to go?

hhelibebcnofnena

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 390
  • Respect: +263
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4743 on: February 13, 2020, 05:01:46 pm »
+1

So, (probable) final updates to Jewelry cards.

First, some cosmetic changes - I decided to give them a different, brighter color than regular treasure. And I had forgotten the top corner amounts in the original versions.

Other changes / comments:

Ring - stays the same; demonstrates cards that will encourage spending more buys
Bracelet - changed cost from $4 to $5; demonstrates cards that care about other cards you bought
Necklace - while I liked the idea of a self contraband, but this seemed too limiting (and the wording was awkward). So now it only self-contrabands if you play before buying and you can still buy cards up to 5.



And I've added a new card, Earrings: a treasure card that (effectively) produces $4 per turn; however it does this by making you gain a silver and first make a buy (so either you have to split your $ for multiple good buys OR buy a copper; i.e. you get $4 to spend, but gain a copper and a silver)



I'm also adding this blurb to the original post:

Ring - uses mechanic to encourage spending more buys
Bracelet - uses mechanic to care about other cards you bought
Necklace - uses mechanic to limit buy power of the card
Earrings - uses mechanic to interact with other cards that draw after you buy (and limits buy power of the card)

Bracelet at the moment seems like it is only decreasing the cost in the moment you play it. I'm fairly sure that you meant it to decrease the cost either for the rest of the turn or for the duration that it stays in play (this matters for Crown), based on which cards you have bought before you played it.

That being said, it's fairly clear what Bracelet is meant to do, and since the judging is based on the mechanic rather than the cards themselves, that should be fine. I just thought I would point it out. These all look really cool (and I like how they all have +1 Buy - not necessary for the mechanic, but a clear synergy with it).
Logged
Hydrogen Helium Lithium Beryllium Boron Carbon Nitrogen Oxygen Fluorine Neon Sodium

Kudasai

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 454
  • Respect: +261
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4744 on: February 13, 2020, 06:06:23 pm »
+1

Posting this in case I miss the deadline.




 Also Kudasai those Leader cards are fun. I want to choose Tactical which is perhaps why I'm actually seldom winning my games.

I appreciate the comment! I'm torn on Tactical. It seems strictly better than a double Silver opening, which I don't like. Not that double Silver is especially strong. It is however the ever present strategy that allows a player to hit higher price points. Tactical does the same thing, but without adding 2 stop cards into your deck. It probably needs to give enough debt to make you skip around 2.5 to 3.0 turns. Or just straight up say, "skip your first 3 turns of the game."

Anyways, I'm glad you think they're fun and I think you've chosen the strongest of the 4 Leaders. So it's probably not your card assessment that's losing you games! :P
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 06:08:07 pm by Kudasai »
Logged

X-tra

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 39
  • Respect: +47
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4745 on: February 13, 2020, 06:11:19 pm »
+1

Posting this in case I miss the deadline.




 Also Kudasai those Leader cards are fun. I want to choose Tactical which is perhaps why I'm actually seldom winning my games.

I appreciate the comment! I'm torn on Tactical. It seems strictly better than a double Silver opening, which I don't like. Not that double Silver is especially strong. It is however the ever present strategy that allows a player to hit higher price points. Tactical does the same thing, but without adding 2 stop cards into your deck. It probably needs to give enough debt to make you skip around 2.5 to 3.0 turns. Or just straight up say, "skip your first 3 turns of the game."

Anyways, I'm glad you think they're fun and I think you've chosen the strongest of the 4 Leaders. So it's probably not your card assessment that's losing you games! :P

Saying "Skip your first 3 turns", in my opinion, could totally work. It isn't in Dominion's traditional jargon, but why not create the term specifically for your card? Not unlike Masquerade which is the only card that uses the unique "pass" command, Tactical could own the exclusivity of the "skip" command. Explanation on what to do when encountering a "skip" effect would be laid out in the rulebook of the set introducing that card anyway.  :)
« Last Edit: February 13, 2020, 09:15:10 pm by X-tra »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1550
  • Respect: +1177
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4746 on: February 13, 2020, 06:18:16 pm »
+1

Tactical is better (not strictly, but mostly) than opening Treasury/-, a decent but not outstanding opening, so it will depend on the board
Logged

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4747 on: February 13, 2020, 07:55:24 pm »
+1

Bracelet at the moment seems like it is only decreasing the cost in the moment you play it. I'm fairly sure that you meant it to decrease the cost either for the rest of the turn or for the duration that it stays in play (this matters for Crown), based on which cards you have bought before you played it.

That being said, it's fairly clear what Bracelet is meant to do, and since the judging is based on the mechanic rather than the cards themselves, that should be fine. I just thought I would point it out. These all look really cool (and I like how they all have +1 Buy - not necessary for the mechanic, but a clear synergy with it).

You're right about the intention. It needs a "for the rest of your turn" clause.

One challenge with the Jewelry mechanic (and any new mechanic, of course) is making sure that the same or similar effect can't be equally or more effectively achieved with existing mechanics.

A regular treasure with a "while this is in play, cards that share a type with cards you've bought this turn cost $1 less", while not the same, might be similar enough to what Bracelet is trying to do.
 
Hmm, now I'm wondering about the other cards:
Earrings compares to a regular treasure that said "When you play this, the next time you buy a card this turn, +$2 and gain a silver.", but that's different enough - you'd be able to spend the first $2 on the first buy and then get the $2 (and silver). Earrings on the other hand is one or the other - play it first for the $2 with no bonus, or buy something without it, then get all $4. So it feels like a good use of the mechanic, I think.

(though I might still remove the "then play any number of treasures" , just letting you play the silver. And have a new card with
+ Cards based on cards you've bought and then play any number of treasures...)

Ring (as a hybrid Treasure - Night type mechanic) and Necklace (limitation only if you play as a regular treasure) also show that there's some versatility for this mechanic.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2020, 01:11:44 am by scolapasta »
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

scolapasta

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 220
  • Respect: +165
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4748 on: February 14, 2020, 12:19:08 am »
0

Did I say final update?? Ha.

Here are a couple more tweaks, and a new card!

• Bracelet: added "this turn"
• Earrings: tightened up, as I realized multiple earrings could benefit from that 1st buy, and moved the "then play all Treasures" clause to ->

Jewelry Box, the more you've bought the more you draw, and then you can play any Treasures (and as before, combos with other ways of drawing Treasures when buying)

Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

Something_Smart

  • Salvager
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 62
  • Shuffle iT Username: S_Smart
  • Respect: +64
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #4749 on: February 14, 2020, 12:58:52 am »
0

Updated my Enchantment cards to make them more powerful. I tried to make them more self-synergistic, as well, just to make sure there's something that combos with them to some extent.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 188 189 [190] 191 192 ... 196  All
 

Page created in 0.144 seconds with 21 queries.