Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 229 230 [231] 232 233 ... 327  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contests #1 - #100  (Read 1547240 times)

0 Members and 8 Guests are viewing this topic.

somekindoftony

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 111
  • Respect: +77
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5750 on: May 20, 2020, 09:22:39 pm »
0

Am I allowed, contest wise, to make Scrap Metal an Action?

I wont have a problem with that. You're not making up a whole lot of potential kingdom cards to justify a new currency. You're kind of making a new token (a +Buy token would also be ok along the lines of a villager for buys) but just presenting said token on a card. The real subject for judging is the original treasure.

I am trying to stay out of giving subjective feedback but I will also try and answer any of these sorts of questions. Repeat them in big font if I miss them. :)
Logged

[TP] Inferno

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 177
  • I have no +Buys :(
  • Respect: +162
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5751 on: May 21, 2020, 05:39:02 am »
0

Am I allowed, contest wise, to make Scrap Metal an Action?

I wont have a problem with that. You're not making up a whole lot of potential kingdom cards to justify a new currency. You're kind of making a new token (a +Buy token would also be ok along the lines of a villager for buys) but just presenting said token on a card. The real subject for judging is the original treasure.

I am trying to stay out of giving subjective feedback but I will also try and answer any of these sorts of questions. Repeat them in big font if I miss them. :)
Ok, thanks very much. Scrap Metal is now an Action.
Logged
Counting House is the best card in the game. Change my mind.

mad4math

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 51
  • Shuffle iT Username: madd4math
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5752 on: May 21, 2020, 07:50:35 am »
0


Cow
$5 - Treasure
Worth $2
When you discard this from play during Clean-up, if you haven't bought any Victory cards this turn, you may put this on top of the deck.


The "no victory card" clause prevents gaining a Province per turn with 4 Cows.
Flavor: Cows are the main measure of wealth in many agricultural societies. "Cash cow" is a kind of business that generates steady profit.
Art: This "Cash Cow" sculpture is located at the entrance to the Happy Hollow park in San Jose, CA.

Treasury is to Cow what Poacher (without empty pile) is to Silver. If your average card is better than Copper, Treasury is better than Cow.

I agree with this comparison, or at least it's conclusion that treasury is better than Cow. Cow seems extremely weak, like bottom 1% of $5 cost cards weak. It is unbuyable in an engine because you don't want silver anyway and its ability is useless to engines. In money even it is super weak because you will never prefer it to gold at $6, and the few times you hit $5 you will usually prefer any terminal action to Cow.

I would suggest lowering the cost to $4, and maybe considering some minor change to make it not strictly better than silver. I think it is balanced (but still on the weak side) at $4 but there is a weak rule against silver+ at $4.
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 487
  • Respect: +391
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5753 on: May 21, 2020, 08:55:48 am »
+1


I think in this contest flavor has an important role.

I’m from Brazil, so I chose the currency to be fruits of my country. They really were one of the currencies here in barter times, at the same time of castles and knights in Europe. So, they have a similar flavor to Hinterlands expansion cards.

Here’s my entry:

   

Quote
TROPICAL FRUITS• Treasure
$1
Choose one:
+1 Coffers; or
+1 Villager.

FRUIT MIX • Treasure
+1 Buy
When you play this, it's worth $1 per different named treasure you have in play (including this).

It’s a split pile with 5 Tropical Fruits over 5 Fruit Mix.

TROPICAL FRUITS
A Copper with a chosen bonus, a Coffers or a Villagers, which has big versatility, enabling good resources control. You can choose either use payload now, save payload or save actions.

FRUIT MIX
A Bank variant which cares for treasure names and give +buy. The split pile itself has two different named treasures, so without other alternative treasures in kingdom it may worth up to $5. It may shine with these other treasures in kingdom and even sometimes be very strong with Capitalism, but it’s the same with Bank. The +Buy feature ensures you won’t lose your additional money.

With $4 in hand it’s (almost) strictly better to buy Tropical Fruits than Silver, but you still may want to buy some Silver for more diversity to Fruit Mix. Tropical Fruits being a better choice than Silver in most cases also helps to buy them fast to reveal Fruit Mix sooner.

Feedbacks are always welcome.


Fruit Mix feels very similar to Bank to me.


Thank you! As I said it's a Bank variant, but I think it plays very different from Bank, since variety is tough to achieve. With four Coppers and Bank your Bank worth $5. For the same result with Fruit Mix, you would need five different treasures. It is more in the spirit of Cornucopia cards than Prosperity cards. It also has +Buy.

I suppose it's a bit harder to get it to "pop off" like Bank. I guess I'm worried that this becomes a far superior alternative to Gold most of the time because it will almost always be worth at least $3 and it has a +Buy on it too.

Yes, but it's not an automatic Gold+, you have to align three different treasures for it to be. Also, it's the second card of a split pile, not available all the time and with the extra cost of buying top cards first. Besides that, you probably would want to buy Gold anyway to give the variety needed by Fruit Mix.

Aligning three different treasures is not very difficult. Fruit Mix counts as one of those three so you really only need a copper + something else (which you almost certainly have a lot of thanks to the strength of Tropical Fruits).

It is true that it isn't available all the time; however, the strength of Fruit Mix makes me think that this will almost always be available when you want it in the games where you would buy it anyways. I don't see myself picking up a gold in Fruit Mix games most of the time because by the time I have a Fruit Mix either a) I'm drawing my deck and getting +$4 from each fruit mix is enough (assuming copper, silver, tropical fruits) or b) I'm not drawing that much so it's unlikely that buying a gold actually increases variety.

It's definitely worse than Gold in sloggy games but I don't think that's enough to make it not too good in the average case.


A Gold is a guaranteed $3 with only one card, so in your situation B (not drawing so much) it’s not obvious that a Fruit Mix is better than it.

In situations with good draw and deck control of course it’s easier to align 3 cards, but I think it’s counterbalanced by the fact that the cards needed to be aligned in this case are treasures, a type of card which presence in deck hinder good draw and deck control.

In many situations Fruit Mix is not automatically better than Gold:

- with junkers or cursers.

- without trashers.

- without good draw.

- with handsize attacks.

- with cards which care about Gold.

- in situations you could buy a Gold without the step of buy a Silver first.

- in decks you may want only one or two treasures which give some payload and don’t clog your engine.

- after start greening (it’s harder either to draw deck or align cards in start hand).

- when it collides with other copies of itself without other treasures (Gold + Gold + Gold = $9 – Fruit Mix + Fruit Mix = Fruit Mix = $3). This also makes it a card that is not always automatically good to overbuy.

In your example A, Fruit Mix is better of course, but it’s the kind of situation in which you also always activate your Conspirators or other cards that need some cards to be played before to do its better. Even in this situation A, I think I would want to buy a Gold, either to replace that Copper or to make my Fruit Mix worth $5 (since I have +Buy, why I would want produce only $8 per turn?).

Anyway, it’s possible to include a clause that you get +Buy only if it worth $4 or more, but I really don’t know if it’s necessary. What do you think?

Logged

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5754 on: May 21, 2020, 09:13:10 am »
+2

Alright, let's give this a shot. I've got this wacky idea, let's see how unbalanced that whole shtick is. :D



There would be 4 of each player colour Spoilage tokens. So 4 red ones, 4 green ones, etc. This is what a Spoilage token would look like:


Example of a Spoilage token for the blue player

Flavour wise: Pretty straight forward here. Salt (among other spices) was used to extend the shelf life of various food back before refrigeration was invented. Thus, it reduces the spoilage of your Meat cards.
Function wise: Meat always gives you as much as your current number of "taken" Spoilage tokens. "Removed" Spoilage tokens makes them "un-taken". This includes the 4th Spoilage token that you have not taken at the beginning of the game. Thus, playing your first Meat will grant you , aka a Silver.
Balance wise: My biggest concern would be whether Meat should cost instead.


EDIT: V1 version of Meat before Carline helped to better word it.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 04:11:03 pm by X-tra »
Logged
Bottom text

mandioca15

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +237
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5755 on: May 21, 2020, 02:40:12 pm »
+1

Wow, I sure did forget to come back and clean up my entry for last week; I kept meaning to but always got myself sidetracked somehow.

Anyways...



Quote
Seeds
Trash this. If you did, gain an Action card costing differently from any card you have in play onto your deck.

Treasure
$4



Credit tokens are essentially like coffers. During your turn, you may return N credit tokens to the supply, to gain a card from the supply costing exactly $N. You can do this whenever you are not resolving a played card. The longer you let your Credits build up,the bigger the potential reward - but don't wait too long! For example, suppose you have built up 6 Credit tokens. You could return 4 to the supply to gain a Smithy, or return 6 to gain a Gold. There's also the question of when exactly during your turn you should gain the card - maybe you can time it to get the card you really want at exactly the right time.

Gaining a card via Credits does not count as a buy.

Credit Note (Treasure, $5)

+$2
+1 Credit
+1 Buy
---
When you gain this, +1 Credit.
I like the idea of the credit tokens. However, I'm worried that Credit Note is a bit weak (it seems unlikely that you would gain more than one card per credit note in your deck most of the time).



Trash Heap
$5
Treasure
$1
Gain a Scrap Metal.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 less, but not less than $0.

Scrap Metal
$0*
Treasure
+1 Card
+1 Buy
(This is not in the Supply.)

So, Trash Heap doesn't just deal in $, it gives some pieces of Scrap Metal. This Scrap Metal isn't valuable enough to give $, but it essentially acts as a +Buy token. It's a Treasure so that it is redeemable in the Buy phase. Trash Heap is a Bridge variant where the +Buy is saved, but it isn't Throneable and it's more expensive. Hopefully there's no glaring problem with these cards that I haven't picked up on.
Oh, and by the way, there are 30 Scrap Metal cards in the pile.

Is Scrap Metal supposed to return itself to its pile? You make a comparison with a +Buy token that doesn't make sense to me otherwise. Either way, this seems a bit weak to me based on comparison with Highway. The +1 Card on Scrap Metal can also make it feel pretty bad because it always draws actions dead.




Cow
$5 - Treasure
Worth $2
When you discard this from play during Clean-up, if you haven't bought any Victory cards this turn, you may put this on top of the deck.


The "no victory card" clause prevents gaining a Province per turn with 4 Cows.
Flavor: Cows are the main measure of wealth in many agricultural societies. "Cash cow" is a kind of business that generates steady profit.
Art: This "Cash Cow" sculpture is located at the entrance to the Happy Hollow park in San Jose, CA.


I feel like this encourages money strategies too much, as it seems strong in a money context and weak for other types of decks.



Rai Stone
Treasure
$5
------------
+$3
+1 Buy
At the end of the Buy phase, if you did not buy a Victory card, gain a Curse.

Rai Stones are fascinating - they're limestone discs used by the people of Yap as a currency. They vary widely in size though, with diameters up to 4 metres, so often when they're traded it's in name only, and the object physically stays where it is. In one case, one was dropped into the ocean and was never seen again, but everyone agrees it's probably still there, so it's still traded.

I'm not completely happy with this card - thematically, I've skipped over most of the things that are interesting about rai stones and focussed on their ceremonial nature - they're primarily used for big, important transactions. I suspect something more geared towards them being cumbersome, or staying in one place, wants to be something more akin to a Project or Artefact. But it's mechanically cute, so I'll go with it for now.

This card also feels very money-ish to me.



I think in this contest flavor has an important role.

I’m from Brazil, so I chose the currency to be fruits of my country. They really were one of the currencies here in barter times, at the same time of castles and knights in Europe. So, they have a similar flavor to Hinterlands expansion cards.

Here’s my entry:

   

Quote
TROPICAL FRUITS• Treasure
$1
Choose one:
+1 Coffers; or
+1 Villager.

FRUIT MIX • Treasure
+1 Buy
When you play this, it's worth $1 per different named treasure you have in play (including this).

It’s a split pile with 5 Tropical Fruits over 5 Fruit Mix.

TROPICAL FRUITS
A Copper with a chosen bonus, a Coffers or a Villagers, which has big versatility, enabling good resources control. You can choose either use payload now, save payload or save actions.

FRUIT MIX
A Bank variant which cares for treasure names and give +buy. The split pile itself has two different named treasures, so without other alternative treasures in kingdom it may worth up to $5. It may shine with these other treasures in kingdom and even sometimes be very strong with Capitalism, but it’s the same with Bank. The +Buy feature ensures you won’t lose your additional money.

With $4 in hand it’s (almost) strictly better to buy Tropical Fruits than Silver, but you still may want to buy some Silver for more diversity to Fruit Mix. Tropical Fruits being a better choice than Silver in most cases also helps to buy them fast to reveal Fruit Mix sooner.

Feedbacks are always welcome.

Tropical Fruits is a silver+ at 4, which is usually a bad idea.

Fruit Mix feels very similar to Bank to me.



Rice Bag
cost $4 - Treasure
+$2
Another +$1 per a Rice Bag on your Exile mat.
You may Exile this.

Japanese old currency.

This seems really strong to me, it's like a stronger Stockpile that only removes itself from your deck if you want it to. Getting both the normal effect of the card and being able to Exile it on the same turn make it relatively low-opportunity cost to scale when compared to cards like Miser and Pirate Ship, which are both terminal and require you to spend an entire play of the card just to power it up (granted, both of those cards are pretty weak).

Would this version work better, or is it too powerful?

Credit Note (Treasure, $5)

+$2
+1 Buy
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Credit.
Logged

Carline

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 487
  • Respect: +391
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5756 on: May 21, 2020, 03:30:29 pm »
+1

Alright, let's give this a shot. I've got this wacky idea, let's see how unbalanced that whole shtick is. :D



There would be 4 of each player colour Spoilage tokens. So 4 red ones, 4 green ones, etc. This is what a Spoilage token would look like:


Example of a Spoilage token for the blue player

Flavour wise: Pretty straight forward here. Salt (among other spices) was used to extend the shelf life of various food back before refrigeration was invented. Thus, it reduces the spoilage of your Meat cards.
Function wise: Meat always gives you as much as your current number of "taken" Spoilage tokens. "Removed" Spoilage tokens makes them "un-taken". This includes the 4th Spoilage token that you have not taken at the beginning of the game. Thus, playing your first Meat will grant you , aka a Silver.
Balance wise: My biggest concern would be whether Meat should cost instead.

I like this idea very much, it has an interesting interaction between mechanic and flavor.

If you play a second Meat in a turn, you can’t remove a token because of the clause of one removal by turn. So, you take four tokens. Is it intended? In this way, I think Salt loses importance.
Logged

X-tra

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 464
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +1113
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5757 on: May 21, 2020, 03:48:54 pm »
0

I like this idea very much, it has an interesting interaction between mechanic and flavor.

If you play a second Meat in a turn, you can’t remove a token because of the clause of one removal by turn. So, you take four tokens. Is it intended? In this way, I think Salt loses importance.

Good call. This is not intended. It should say "or take 4 Spoilage tokens if you have none". I had not seen the potential confusion that the "if you can't" part can create until you pointed it out. Thanks for that, will update my post above !

EDIT: Actually, V3 of Meat is already out since I figured an even better way of wording the damn thing. And it reduces the amount of text on the card, yay!
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 04:11:54 pm by X-tra »
Logged
Bottom text

D782802859

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
  • Respect: +381
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5758 on: May 21, 2020, 03:59:24 pm »
+1


I've always been interested in the idea of a treasure that can draw you cards, and Cowrie gives you a way to do it. Of course, it has a way to save actions so that it doesn't feel too bad to draw into an action, and you can save your other stuff if you want. Since it's a treasure, you can bild a neat little engine based on using a treasure as draw or have it as a utility.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 04:29:27 pm by D782802859 »
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5759 on: May 21, 2020, 04:08:40 pm »
0

Wow, I sure did forget to come back and clean up my entry for last week; I kept meaning to but always got myself sidetracked somehow.

Anyways...



Quote
Seeds
Trash this. If you did, gain an Action card costing differently from any card you have in play onto your deck.

Treasure
$4


In first turns it's a Feast+ which topdecks, maybe too powerful with $6 or $7 actions in kingdom or even strong $5 actions.

This is purposely much better than Feast; this is because Feast was so bad that you could just not consider its existence on the majority of boards. I wondered if the top-decking might make it too good though (probably will think about that more). It is intended to shake up the early game like Chapel or Stockpile do (though hopefully in a way that feels different, and maybe not quite as insane) while not trivializing the problem of building up your deck.




I think in this contest flavor has an important role.

I’m from Brazil, so I chose the currency to be fruits of my country. They really were one of the currencies here in barter times, at the same time of castles and knights in Europe. So, they have a similar flavor to Hinterlands expansion cards.

Here’s my entry:

   

Quote
TROPICAL FRUITS• Treasure
$1
Choose one:
+1 Coffers; or
+1 Villager.

FRUIT MIX • Treasure
+1 Buy
When you play this, it's worth $1 per different named treasure you have in play (including this).

It’s a split pile with 5 Tropical Fruits over 5 Fruit Mix.

TROPICAL FRUITS
A Copper with a chosen bonus, a Coffers or a Villagers, which has big versatility, enabling good resources control. You can choose either use payload now, save payload or save actions.

FRUIT MIX
A Bank variant which cares for treasure names and give +buy. The split pile itself has two different named treasures, so without other alternative treasures in kingdom it may worth up to $5. It may shine with these other treasures in kingdom and even sometimes be very strong with Capitalism, but it’s the same with Bank. The +Buy feature ensures you won’t lose your additional money.

With $4 in hand it’s (almost) strictly better to buy Tropical Fruits than Silver, but you still may want to buy some Silver for more diversity to Fruit Mix. Tropical Fruits being a better choice than Silver in most cases also helps to buy them fast to reveal Fruit Mix sooner.

Feedbacks are always welcome.


Fruit Mix feels very similar to Bank to me.


Thank you! As I said it's a Bank variant, but I think it plays very different from Bank, since variety is tough to achieve. With four Coppers and Bank your Bank worth $5. For the same result with Fruit Mix, you would need five different treasures. It is more in the spirit of Cornucopia cards than Prosperity cards. It also has +Buy.

I suppose it's a bit harder to get it to "pop off" like Bank. I guess I'm worried that this becomes a far superior alternative to Gold most of the time because it will almost always be worth at least $3 and it has a +Buy on it too.

Yes, but it's not an automatic Gold+, you have to align three different treasures for it to be. Also, it's the second card of a split pile, not available all the time and with the extra cost of buying top cards first. Besides that, you probably would want to buy Gold anyway to give the variety needed by Fruit Mix.

Aligning three different treasures is not very difficult. Fruit Mix counts as one of those three so you really only need a copper + something else (which you almost certainly have a lot of thanks to the strength of Tropical Fruits).

It is true that it isn't available all the time; however, the strength of Fruit Mix makes me think that this will almost always be available when you want it in the games where you would buy it anyways. I don't see myself picking up a gold in Fruit Mix games most of the time because by the time I have a Fruit Mix either a) I'm drawing my deck and getting +$4 from each fruit mix is enough (assuming copper, silver, tropical fruits) or b) I'm not drawing that much so it's unlikely that buying a gold actually increases variety.

It's definitely worse than Gold in sloggy games but I don't think that's enough to make it not too good in the average case.


A Gold is a guaranteed $3 with only one card, so in your situation B (not drawing so much) it’s not obvious that a Fruit Mix is better than it.

In situations with good draw and deck control of course it’s easier to align 3 cards, but I think it’s counterbalanced by the fact that the cards needed to be aligned in this case are treasures, a type of card which presence in deck hinder good draw and deck control.

In many situations Fruit Mix is not automatically better than Gold:

- with junkers or cursers.

- without trashers.

- without good draw.

- with handsize attacks.

- with cards which care about Gold.

- in situations you could buy a Gold without the step of buy a Silver first.

- in decks you may want only one or two treasures which give some payload and don’t clog your engine.

- after start greening (it’s harder either to draw deck or align cards in start hand).

- when it collides with other copies of itself without other treasures (Gold + Gold + Gold = $9 – Fruit Mix + Fruit Mix = Fruit Mix = $3). This also makes it a card that is not always automatically good to overbuy.

In your example A, Fruit Mix is better of course, but it’s the kind of situation in which you also always activate your Conspirators or other cards that need some cards to be played before to do its better. Even in this situation A, I think I would want to buy a Gold, either to replace that Copper or to make my Fruit Mix worth $5 (since I have +Buy, why I would want produce only $8 per turn?).

Anyway, it’s possible to include a clause that you get +Buy only if it worth $4 or more, but I really don’t know if it’s necessary. What do you think?

I like that a lot. It makes it evoke those cards from nocturne like Magic Lamp and Leprechaun that force you to do things you normally wouldn't for a reward (although in this case the challenge and reward aren't as large in magnitude).

Also I don't disagree that there are situations where Fruit Mix is worse than a Gold+, I just think those situations aren't particularly common in the games where you uncover Fruit Mix in the first place. I think I might be overestimating how many games are engine games though.



Alright, let's give this a shot. I've got this wacky idea, let's see how unbalanced that whole shtick is. :D



There would be 4 of each player colour Spoilage tokens. So 4 red ones, 4 green ones, etc. This is what a Spoilage token would look like:


Example of a Spoilage token for the blue player

Flavour wise: Pretty straight forward here. Salt (among other spices) was used to extend the shelf life of various food back before refrigeration was invented. Thus, it reduces the spoilage of your Meat cards.
Function wise: Meat always gives you as much as your current number of "taken" Spoilage tokens. "Removed" Spoilage tokens makes them "un-taken". This includes the 4th Spoilage token that you have not taken at the beginning of the game. Thus, playing your first Meat will grant you , aka a Silver.
Balance wise: My biggest concern would be whether Meat should cost instead.

I think Meat is a bit on the weak side because of the turns that you play it for $1 and $0, so it's probably fine costing $3 (even though the average coin generated is the same as silver this has a very different distribution).

I feel like Salt might play awkwardly. Ideally you only want to play Salt if you currently have 0 or 4 spoilage tokens, as you probably want the strongest version of meat possible. This might end up being really compelling as a strategic element though; it's really hard to tell just from reading it.



...

Trash Heap
$5
Treasure
$1
Gain a Scrap Metal.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 less, but not less than $0.

Scrap Metal
$0*
Treasure
+1 Card
+1 Buy
(This is not in the Supply.)

So, Trash Heap doesn't just deal in $, it gives some pieces of Scrap Metal. This Scrap Metal isn't valuable enough to give $, but it essentially acts as a +Buy token. It's a Treasure so that it is redeemable in the Buy phase. Trash Heap is a Bridge variant where the +Buy is saved, but it isn't Throneable and it's more expensive. Hopefully there's no glaring problem with these cards that I haven't picked up on.
Oh, and by the way, there are 30 Scrap Metal cards in the pile.

Is Scrap Metal supposed to return itself to its pile? You make a comparison with a +Buy token that doesn't make sense to me otherwise. Either way, this seems a bit weak to me based on comparison with Highway. The +1 Card on Scrap Metal can also make it feel pretty bad because it always draws actions dead.
...

Would this version work better, or is it too powerful?

Credit Note (Treasure, $5)

+$2
+1 Buy
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Credit.

I like this a lot. It seems like it would play like a weaker version of cost-reduction cards in this form (which is fine given that the rest of the stuff on the card is much stronger than on cost reducers).




I've always been interested in the idea of a treasure that can draw you cards, and Cowrie gives you a way to do it. Of course, it has a way to save actions so that it doesn't feel too bad to draw into an action, and you can save your other stuff if you want. Since it's a treasure, you can bild a neat little engine based on using a treasure as draw or have it as a utility.

As the card is written, there is no way to get this onto your tavern mat.

Assuming that it is supposed to be put on your tavern mat on play, I think that this is pretty strong for its cost. It's also a Silver+ so it should probably cost $5.
Logged

D782802859

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 291
  • Respect: +381
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5760 on: May 21, 2020, 04:29:00 pm »
0

Wow, I sure did forget to come back and clean up my entry for last week; I kept meaning to but always got myself sidetracked somehow.

Anyways...



Quote
Seeds
Trash this. If you did, gain an Action card costing differently from any card you have in play onto your deck.

Treasure
$4


In first turns it's a Feast+ which topdecks, maybe too powerful with $6 or $7 actions in kingdom or even strong $5 actions.

This is purposely much better than Feast; this is because Feast was so bad that you could just not consider its existence on the majority of boards. I wondered if the top-decking might make it too good though (probably will think about that more). It is intended to shake up the early game like Chapel or Stockpile do (though hopefully in a way that feels different, and maybe not quite as insane) while not trivializing the problem of building up your deck.




I think in this contest flavor has an important role.

I’m from Brazil, so I chose the currency to be fruits of my country. They really were one of the currencies here in barter times, at the same time of castles and knights in Europe. So, they have a similar flavor to Hinterlands expansion cards.

Here’s my entry:

   

Quote
TROPICAL FRUITS• Treasure
$1
Choose one:
+1 Coffers; or
+1 Villager.

FRUIT MIX • Treasure
+1 Buy
When you play this, it's worth $1 per different named treasure you have in play (including this).

It’s a split pile with 5 Tropical Fruits over 5 Fruit Mix.

TROPICAL FRUITS
A Copper with a chosen bonus, a Coffers or a Villagers, which has big versatility, enabling good resources control. You can choose either use payload now, save payload or save actions.

FRUIT MIX
A Bank variant which cares for treasure names and give +buy. The split pile itself has two different named treasures, so without other alternative treasures in kingdom it may worth up to $5. It may shine with these other treasures in kingdom and even sometimes be very strong with Capitalism, but it’s the same with Bank. The +Buy feature ensures you won’t lose your additional money.

With $4 in hand it’s (almost) strictly better to buy Tropical Fruits than Silver, but you still may want to buy some Silver for more diversity to Fruit Mix. Tropical Fruits being a better choice than Silver in most cases also helps to buy them fast to reveal Fruit Mix sooner.

Feedbacks are always welcome.


Fruit Mix feels very similar to Bank to me.


Thank you! As I said it's a Bank variant, but I think it plays very different from Bank, since variety is tough to achieve. With four Coppers and Bank your Bank worth $5. For the same result with Fruit Mix, you would need five different treasures. It is more in the spirit of Cornucopia cards than Prosperity cards. It also has +Buy.

I suppose it's a bit harder to get it to "pop off" like Bank. I guess I'm worried that this becomes a far superior alternative to Gold most of the time because it will almost always be worth at least $3 and it has a +Buy on it too.

Yes, but it's not an automatic Gold+, you have to align three different treasures for it to be. Also, it's the second card of a split pile, not available all the time and with the extra cost of buying top cards first. Besides that, you probably would want to buy Gold anyway to give the variety needed by Fruit Mix.

Aligning three different treasures is not very difficult. Fruit Mix counts as one of those three so you really only need a copper + something else (which you almost certainly have a lot of thanks to the strength of Tropical Fruits).

It is true that it isn't available all the time; however, the strength of Fruit Mix makes me think that this will almost always be available when you want it in the games where you would buy it anyways. I don't see myself picking up a gold in Fruit Mix games most of the time because by the time I have a Fruit Mix either a) I'm drawing my deck and getting +$4 from each fruit mix is enough (assuming copper, silver, tropical fruits) or b) I'm not drawing that much so it's unlikely that buying a gold actually increases variety.

It's definitely worse than Gold in sloggy games but I don't think that's enough to make it not too good in the average case.


A Gold is a guaranteed $3 with only one card, so in your situation B (not drawing so much) it’s not obvious that a Fruit Mix is better than it.

In situations with good draw and deck control of course it’s easier to align 3 cards, but I think it’s counterbalanced by the fact that the cards needed to be aligned in this case are treasures, a type of card which presence in deck hinder good draw and deck control.

In many situations Fruit Mix is not automatically better than Gold:

- with junkers or cursers.

- without trashers.

- without good draw.

- with handsize attacks.

- with cards which care about Gold.

- in situations you could buy a Gold without the step of buy a Silver first.

- in decks you may want only one or two treasures which give some payload and don’t clog your engine.

- after start greening (it’s harder either to draw deck or align cards in start hand).

- when it collides with other copies of itself without other treasures (Gold + Gold + Gold = $9 – Fruit Mix + Fruit Mix = Fruit Mix = $3). This also makes it a card that is not always automatically good to overbuy.

In your example A, Fruit Mix is better of course, but it’s the kind of situation in which you also always activate your Conspirators or other cards that need some cards to be played before to do its better. Even in this situation A, I think I would want to buy a Gold, either to replace that Copper or to make my Fruit Mix worth $5 (since I have +Buy, why I would want produce only $8 per turn?).

Anyway, it’s possible to include a clause that you get +Buy only if it worth $4 or more, but I really don’t know if it’s necessary. What do you think?

I like that a lot. It makes it evoke those cards from nocturne like Magic Lamp and Leprechaun that force you to do things you normally wouldn't for a reward (although in this case the challenge and reward aren't as large in magnitude).

Also I don't disagree that there are situations where Fruit Mix is worse than a Gold+, I just think those situations aren't particularly common in the games where you uncover Fruit Mix in the first place. I think I might be overestimating how many games are engine games though.



Alright, let's give this a shot. I've got this wacky idea, let's see how unbalanced that whole shtick is. :D



There would be 4 of each player colour Spoilage tokens. So 4 red ones, 4 green ones, etc. This is what a Spoilage token would look like:


Example of a Spoilage token for the blue player

Flavour wise: Pretty straight forward here. Salt (among other spices) was used to extend the shelf life of various food back before refrigeration was invented. Thus, it reduces the spoilage of your Meat cards.
Function wise: Meat always gives you as much as your current number of "taken" Spoilage tokens. "Removed" Spoilage tokens makes them "un-taken". This includes the 4th Spoilage token that you have not taken at the beginning of the game. Thus, playing your first Meat will grant you , aka a Silver.
Balance wise: My biggest concern would be whether Meat should cost instead.

I think Meat is a bit on the weak side because of the turns that you play it for $1 and $0, so it's probably fine costing $3 (even though the average coin generated is the same as silver this has a very different distribution).

I feel like Salt might play awkwardly. Ideally you only want to play Salt if you currently have 0 or 4 spoilage tokens, as you probably want the strongest version of meat possible. This might end up being really compelling as a strategic element though; it's really hard to tell just from reading it.



...

Trash Heap
$5
Treasure
$1
Gain a Scrap Metal.
-------
While this is in play, cards cost $1 less, but not less than $0.

Scrap Metal
$0*
Treasure
+1 Card
+1 Buy
(This is not in the Supply.)

So, Trash Heap doesn't just deal in $, it gives some pieces of Scrap Metal. This Scrap Metal isn't valuable enough to give $, but it essentially acts as a +Buy token. It's a Treasure so that it is redeemable in the Buy phase. Trash Heap is a Bridge variant where the +Buy is saved, but it isn't Throneable and it's more expensive. Hopefully there's no glaring problem with these cards that I haven't picked up on.
Oh, and by the way, there are 30 Scrap Metal cards in the pile.

Is Scrap Metal supposed to return itself to its pile? You make a comparison with a +Buy token that doesn't make sense to me otherwise. Either way, this seems a bit weak to me based on comparison with Highway. The +1 Card on Scrap Metal can also make it feel pretty bad because it always draws actions dead.
...

Would this version work better, or is it too powerful?

Credit Note (Treasure, $5)

+$2
+1 Buy
---
While this is in play, when you buy a card, +1 Credit.

I like this a lot. It seems like it would play like a weaker version of cost-reduction cards in this form (which is fine given that the rest of the stuff on the card is much stronger than on cost reducers).




I've always been interested in the idea of a treasure that can draw you cards, and Cowrie gives you a way to do it. Of course, it has a way to save actions so that it doesn't feel too bad to draw into an action, and you can save your other stuff if you want. Since it's a treasure, you can bild a neat little engine based on using a treasure as draw or have it as a utility.

As the card is written, there is no way to get this onto your tavern mat.

Assuming that it is supposed to be put on your tavern mat on play, I think that this is pretty strong for its cost. It's also a Silver+ so it should probably cost $5.
It honestly slipped my mind to include the clause to put it on your tavern mat. I'll fix that. It's not quite a silver+, as it's only a silver every other turn.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5761 on: May 21, 2020, 04:31:07 pm »
+2

Why do people in a world in which Patron exists, a card that is better than Silver in 3 ways (Action, Villagers, Coffers), pretend that the „no Silver+ for $4“ rule still exists?
Cowrie is fine, it’s is only a Silver every second play and the call effect is significantly weaker than Secret Passage  (depending on how you count, you can also view it as Lab plus topdecking Secret Passage). Drawing stuff in your Buy phase is rarely very good. It sucks in an engine so we get a card which slightly favors money. Buffing money rarely leads to broken stuff.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 04:32:31 pm by segura »
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5762 on: May 21, 2020, 05:30:06 pm »
0

...


I've always been interested in the idea of a treasure that can draw you cards, and Cowrie gives you a way to do it. Of course, it has a way to save actions so that it doesn't feel too bad to draw into an action, and you can save your other stuff if you want. Since it's a treasure, you can bild a neat little engine based on using a treasure as draw or have it as a utility.

As the card is written, there is no way to get this onto your tavern mat.

Assuming that it is supposed to be put on your tavern mat on play, I think that this is pretty strong for its cost. It's also a Silver+ so it should probably cost $5.
It honestly slipped my mind to include the clause to put it on your tavern mat. I'll fix that. It's not quite a silver+, as it's only a silver every other turn.

I didn't consider how it would play in a "draw your deck" scenario, it's definitely worse than Silver there. I still think it's too strong to be $4 in a deck that doesn't draw itself though.



Why do people in a world in which Patron exists, a card that is better than Silver in 3 ways (Action, Villagers, Coffers), pretend that the „no Silver+ for $4“ rule still exists?
Cowrie is fine, it’s is only a Silver every second play and the call effect is significantly weaker than Secret Passage  (depending on how you count, you can also view it as Lab plus topdecking Secret Passage). Drawing stuff in your Buy phase is rarely very good. It sucks in an engine so we get a card which slightly favors money. Buffing money rarely leads to broken stuff.

The "no Silver+ for $4" rule isn't a strict rule, it's more of a "this is something you better have a good reason to be breaking" rule. I think Patron works because, even though buying Patron VS Silver isn't much of a decision, the existence of Patron in the kingdom often makes you reconsider the power level of other cards in a way that a lot of proposed Silver+'s don't. For an example, there's the hypothetical Royal Seal at $4. I don't think that the power level of such a card is problematic but the card doesn't introduce any interesting decisions into the game most of the time, the ability to topdeck gained cards doesn't make you want different types of cards like the Villager or the reveal-effect on Patron can.

I disagree that Cowrie is always a bad buy in an engine. If you're playing a deck that doesn't draw itself, then Cowrie is really good at helping you set up your next hand. Of course it's bad as payload, but I would rather have Cowrie than Silver while I'm setting things up.



The Treasure:
Quote
Swan - Treasure, $0* cost.
$2
When you next buy a non-Victory card this turn, exchange this for a copy of the bought card.
(This is not in the Supply.)

And 2 gainers:
Quote
Swannery - Project, $5 cost.
When you shuffle to make a new deck, first gain a Swan.

Quote
Swanherd - Action, $5 cost.
Gain a Swan. You may trash a card from your hand, then +1 Card per card you've trashed this turn.

Swans could be eaten for meat during medieval times, and monks could keep a swannery to sustain themselves or provide a meal for important guests. Their feathers could also be used for hats and quill pens. And yes, someone appointed to manage the swannery was/is called a swanherd.

Swan is similar to Feast to reflect those distinguished meals they made, becoming a copy of a bought card and giving $2 towards that card. That can speed the game up a fair bit, so its gainers need to not be too fast themselves.

Swannery gets you one Swan per shuffle. As you get more Swans the deck usually gets thicker, decreasing the gain rate; unless of course you gain drawing power, so there could be a better gain trigger here.

Swanherd likes having a lot of cards to trash (to have a kind of connection to Goatherd), and Swans help there. I could've just made it 'gain a Swan' but that's a bit boring. Adding +Action is tempting but feels a bit crazy. It's trashing, payload and a bit of draw already.

I like Swannery, it feels like the cost might be a bit high but it's hard to tell how it actually plays out.

Adding +Action to Swanherd would definitely be interesting. It would definitely be strong but I think this would be strong in a way that makes kingdoms more interesting. If you were to do that I would change the trashing to be mandatory to prevent it from being too easy to use.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5763 on: May 21, 2020, 05:52:10 pm »
+2

The point is that DXV broke his own rule when he designed Patron so it makes absolutely no sense to continue to apply a non–existing design guideline to fan cards.
Also, you undervalue Patron and overvalue Cowrie which unlike Cowrie is not even virtually always superior to Silver as it is out of your deck for at least one turn.


About the usefulness of Cowrie in an engine, buy Haven for $2 instead of Cowrie for the supposed appropriate price of $5. Would you mind to point out again why Cowrie should cost $5?
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 05:59:25 pm by segura »
Logged

MiX

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 77
  • Shuffle iT Username: MiX
  • It's me.
  • Respect: +59
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5764 on: May 21, 2020, 06:03:23 pm »
0

The point is that DXV broke his own rule when he designed Patron so it makes absolutely no sense to continue to apply a non–existing design guideline to fan cards.
Also, you undervalue Patron and overvalue Cowrie which unlike Cowrie is not even virtually always superior to Silver as it is out of your deck for at least one turn.


About the usefulness of Cowrie in an engine, buy Haven for $2 instead of Cowrie for the supposed appropriate price of $5. Would you mind to point out again why Cowrie should cost $5?

Haven that comes with a Silver is about $5, yeah. Cowrie's basically at least +1 coin when called, as it's pretty hard not to draw a treasure with it and you can topdeck whatever you want. Seems much better than Silver. It's worth 5 when you draw 2 treasures and topdeck a village for next turn, which is harder to happen if it costs 5, but there's definitely an argument for that cost. I'd make it better somehow for a higher price, however.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5765 on: May 21, 2020, 06:16:05 pm »
+1

I don’t know what decks you play but mine rarely feature a high chance that one of 2 cards is a Treasure unless I play money. Which happens pretty rarely.
So make up you mind. Either the card draws a Treasure in a money deck (hey, I drew a Silver, that Card is just so better than Silver!) or you drew your village and topdecked it in an engine. Like Haven does. For $2.

Yeah, still don’t see how this is better than Patron (which, while we talk about topdecking villages, sometimes does a better job, produce a villager) or even a $5.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 06:18:15 pm by segura »
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5766 on: May 21, 2020, 06:39:10 pm »
0

The point is that DXV broke his own rule when he designed Patron so it makes absolutely no sense to continue to apply a non–existing design guideline to fan cards.
Also, you undervalue Patron and overvalue Cowrie which unlike Cowrie is not even virtually always superior to Silver as it is out of your deck for at least one turn.


About the usefulness of Cowrie in an engine, buy Haven for $2 instead of Cowrie for the supposed appropriate price of $5. Would you mind to point out again why Cowrie should cost $5?

Haven that comes with a Silver is about $5, yeah. Cowrie's basically at least +1 coin when called, as it's pretty hard not to draw a treasure with it and you can topdeck whatever you want. Seems much better than Silver. It's worth 5 when you draw 2 treasures and topdeck a village for next turn, which is harder to happen if it costs 5, but there's definitely an argument for that cost. I'd make it better somehow for a higher price, however.

I'm not convinced that it needs to be better than it is to cost $5. That being said, I don't think that it's so strong that it couldn't take a buff and still be acceptable.



The point is that DXV broke his own rule when he designed Patron so it makes absolutely no sense to continue to apply a non–existing design guideline to fan cards.
Also, you undervalue Patron and overvalue Cowrie which unlike Cowrie is not even virtually always superior to Silver as it is out of your deck for at least one turn.


About the usefulness of Cowrie in an engine, buy Haven for $2 instead of Cowrie for the supposed appropriate price of $5. Would you mind to point out again why Cowrie should cost $5?

There's a reason Patron is the only Silver+ for $4 in the game still. Even though the "no Silver+ for $4" rule isn't always correct, I still think its a useful heuristic because it forces you to look at the reasons why a Silver+ at $4 might be interesting, which are usually different reasons than for other cards (with most cards, you want the interesting decision to be whether or not to gain them / how many to gain; with a Silver+ at $4, you want to consider how the presence of the card changes how much you want the other cards in the kingdom.)

The reason I think Cowrie should be $5 is not only because of the reasons that MiX gave, but that its status as a Reserve card guarantees that the bottom part of the card is called in a situation that you want it most.



I don’t know what decks you play but mine rarely feature a high chance that one of 2 cards is a Treasure unless I play money. Which happens pretty rarely.
So make up you mind. Either the card draws a Treasure in a money deck (hey, I drew a Silver, that Card is just so better than Silver!) or you drew your village and topdecked it in an engine. Like Haven does. For $2.

Yeah, still don’t see how this is better than Patron (which, while we talk about topdecking villages, sometimes does a better job, produce a villager) or even a $5.

This is an incredibly common situation early game, when every deck is a money deck. This is at its weakest as a payload for engine cards, I don't think that focusing on cards at their weakest is helpful to determine balance.

I agree that Patron is often a better buy than Cowrie, every $5 in dominion isn't stronger than every $4. Patron for $4 makes the game more strategically interesting than Cowrie for $4 does though because I don't think the presence of Cowrie makes me change how I play my deck.
Logged

MrHiTech

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 120
  • Shuffle iT Username: MrHiTech
  • Respect: +89
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5767 on: May 22, 2020, 07:34:40 am »
0

Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $6)
$2
Gain a Wish from its pile. You may trash this, to put the gained Wish on your deck.
Okay. This card needs a little explaining. I’m assuming Dominion is in a fantasy, D&D-esque world where the gods give favors in exchange for temple service. Favors are probably the currency of gods to mortals.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5768 on: May 22, 2020, 12:25:05 pm »
0

Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $6)
$2
Gain a Wish from its pile. You may trash this, to put the gained Wish on your deck.
Okay. This card needs a little explaining. I’m assuming Dominion is in a fantasy, D&D-esque world where the gods give favors in exchange for temple service. Favors are probably the currency of gods to mortals.
Looks far too strong compared to other >$4 gainers. It might even be overpowered if it did not yield any Coins.
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5769 on: May 22, 2020, 01:22:08 pm »
+3

Here's my shot at a unique treasure: Livestock.



It's a lab, but a treasure! I feel like you could do some interesting things with this. It seems pretty much inferior to Lab which is why I put it at $4.

Updates: Changed price to $5, seeing as it has some advantages over Lost City and Lab but also some drawbacks.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 04:23:20 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

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5770 on: May 22, 2020, 01:31:01 pm »
+1

Not that it matters except for Villa and Calalry but technically it is a Lost City.
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5771 on: May 22, 2020, 02:29:17 pm »
0

Here's my shot at a unique treasure: Livestock.



It's a lab, but a treasure! I feel like you could do some interesting things with this. It seems pretty much inferior to Lab which is why I put it at $4.
Not that it matters except for Villa and Calalry but technically it is a Lost City.

This isn't even only a Lost City - it has the advantage that it cannot be drawn dead. (Of course, it does have the disadvantage of being bad with non-terminal actions, and requiring slightly more finesse to play.) This could be $5 and I would still buy it often; at $4 I think it is stronger than any other village at that price point given there are no dominant non-terminal cards (i.e. Grand Market). Even then I can still imagine this being a stronger move on certain boards.
Logged

MrHiTech

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 120
  • Shuffle iT Username: MrHiTech
  • Respect: +89
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5772 on: May 22, 2020, 03:18:35 pm »
0

Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $6)
$2
Gain a Wish from its pile. You may trash this, to put the gained Wish on your deck.
Okay. This card needs a little explaining. I’m assuming Dominion is in a fantasy, D&D-esque world where the gods give favors in exchange for temple service. Favors are probably the currency of gods to mortals.
Looks far too strong compared to other >$4 gainers. It might even be overpowered if it did not yield any Coins.
Updating my entry:
Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $4)
$2
-
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you overpaid $1, gain a Wish from its pile. If you overpaid $2 or more, you may put the gained Wish on top of your deck.
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 140
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +178
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5773 on: May 22, 2020, 03:35:24 pm »
0

Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $6)
$2
Gain a Wish from its pile. You may trash this, to put the gained Wish on your deck.
Okay. This card needs a little explaining. I’m assuming Dominion is in a fantasy, D&D-esque world where the gods give favors in exchange for temple service. Favors are probably the currency of gods to mortals.
Looks far too strong compared to other >$4 gainers. It might even be overpowered if it did not yield any Coins.
Updating my entry:
Quote
Divine Favor (Treasure, cost $4)
$2
-
When you buy this, you may overpay for it. If you overpaid $1, gain a Wish from its pile. If you overpaid $2 or more, you may put the gained Wish on top of your deck.

Why not just make it cost $5, and tie the topdecking to overpaying at all?

Also paying $5 for a wish is crazy, even if you don't want the silver.
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1298
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1364
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #5774 on: May 22, 2020, 04:23:58 pm »
0

Here's my shot at a unique treasure: Livestock.

It's a lab, but a treasure! I feel like you could do some interesting things with this. It seems pretty much inferior to Lab which is why I put it at $4.
Not that it matters except for Villa and Calalry but technically it is a Lost City.

This isn't even only a Lost City - it has the advantage that it cannot be drawn dead. (Of course, it does have the disadvantage of being bad with non-terminal actions, and requiring slightly more finesse to play.) This could be $5 and I would still buy it often; at $4 I think it is stronger than any other village at that price point given there are no dominant non-terminal cards (i.e. Grand Market). Even then I can still imagine this being a stronger move on certain boards.

Thanks for the feedback! I upped the cost to $5, but I don't think it needs a drawback like Lost City's, since it does still have disadvantages.
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
Pages: 1 ... 229 230 [231] 232 233 ... 327  All
 

Page created in 0.112 seconds with 21 queries.