Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 ... 310 311 [312] 313 314 ... 327  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contests #1 - #100  (Read 1052845 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Gubump

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1307
  • Respect: +1173
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7775 on: December 12, 2020, 06:30:45 am »
+1

May I suggest a simpler wording?
Well, I am not waiting for an answer. So here it is:

Quote
+1 Action
Take up to 4 Debt to draw an equal
number of cards. This turn, …

Or: … to draw that many cards. This turn...

It is functionally the same, except that drawing 1 Card for 1 Debt is included as an option.
This, however, doesn't interact with the -1 card token in the same way.

I can't see the difference. What is it?
The current version counts the cards you actually drew. So if you have the token, choose the +2 cards option, only draw one card - then you will only take one Debt, whereas your version would have you end up with 2 debt.

There is also a difference in interaction with Way of the Chameleon, I suppose.

I am not sure I understand. When a player chooses +2 Cards, they draw 2 cards and take 2 Debt. If they cannot draw 2 cards, because there are not enough cards left to draw, then they draw 1 card and take 1 Debt.
But with my version, who would take 2 Debt, if they can only draw 1 Card?
I am sure I am missing something...

With the original version: Player chooses to draw n cards. Because of the -1 Card token, player only draws n - 1 cards, and as a result, takes n - 1 debt.
With your suggested version: Player chooses to take n debt. Because of the -1 Card token, player only draws n - 1 cards, but still takes n debt.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Shard of Honor and his Dominion Card Image Generator (the new fork).
If you're having font issues with the generator, click this link and click on the button to request temporary access to the demo server that loads the font.

LibraryAdventurer

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1661
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • I wish my username had the links like it once did.
  • Respect: +1461
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7776 on: December 12, 2020, 06:48:13 am »
+1


newest itteration

i think this will by my submission unless i post another version
I like the idea, but I think it could use better wording. As it is, it seems like the "other than from Fireplace's reaction" and "You may react with multiple fireplaces" parts contradict each other.

Also, I think it needs to be set aside instead of discarded because if you're drawing your deck it can be really strong even for $5. Tell me if I'm reading this right: I play one Fireplace for +2 Villagers and +1 Card. Then discard another Fireplace to get +4 Coffers instead of the 2 Villagers, and another +1 Card. Then I can draw and play the discarded Fireplace later in the turn.

So here's my suggestion for the reaction: "When you would take Coffers or Villagers other than from Fireplace's reaction, you may set this aside from your hand for +1 Card and instead take twice the amount of either token. If you do, discard this at the start of clean-up."

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +491
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7777 on: December 12, 2020, 06:59:07 am »
0

May I suggest a simpler wording?
Well, I am not waiting for an answer. So here it is:

Quote
+1 Action
Take up to 4 Debt to draw an equal
number of cards. This turn, …

Or: … to draw that many cards. This turn...

It is functionally the same, except that drawing 1 Card for 1 Debt is included as an option.
This, however, doesn't interact with the -1 card token in the same way.

I can't see the difference. What is it?
The current version counts the cards you actually drew. So if you have the token, choose the +2 cards option, only draw one card - then you will only take one Debt, whereas your version would have you end up with 2 debt.

There is also a difference in interaction with Way of the Chameleon, I suppose.

I am not sure I understand. When a player chooses +2 Cards, they draw 2 cards and take 2 Debt. If they cannot draw 2 cards, because there are not enough cards left to draw, then they draw 1 card and take 1 Debt.
But with my version, who would take 2 Debt, if they can only draw 1 Card?
I am sure I am missing something...

With the original version: Player chooses to draw n cards. Because of the -1 Card token, player only draws n - 1 cards, and as a result, takes n - 1 debt.
With your suggested version: Player chooses to take n debt. Because of the -1 Card token, player only draws n - 1 cards, but still takes n debt.

That was helpful. I got it now. It is relevant for the next Penance played. Many thanks!
Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7778 on: December 12, 2020, 08:02:26 am »
0

hi everyone! ive never used dominion strategy forums before, but the WDC is really cool.
here is the card im considering as my submission for this weeks contest


hope im doing it right

(also i know the colors are wrong, but ill fix that in a future ittiration)



does this work?

an alternate fireplace design suggested by Funfighter that i like

Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7779 on: December 12, 2020, 10:19:28 am »
0


newest itteration

i think this will by my submission unless i post another version
I like the idea, but I think it could use better wording. As it is, it seems like the "other than from Fireplace's reaction" and "You may react with multiple fireplaces" parts contradict each other.

Also, I think it needs to be set aside instead of discarded because if you're drawing your deck it can be really strong even for $5. Tell me if I'm reading this right: I play one Fireplace for +2 Villagers and +1 Card. Then discard another Fireplace to get +4 Coffers instead of the 2 Villagers, and another +1 Card. Then I can draw and play the discarded Fireplace later in the turn.

So here's my suggestion for the reaction: "When you would take Coffers or Villagers other than from Fireplace's reaction, you may set this aside from your hand for +1 Card and instead take twice the amount of either token. If you do, discard this at the start of clean-up."

you undertood it right. i made another version of the card i think im settling on
Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7780 on: December 12, 2020, 10:20:57 am »
0

hi everyone! ive never used dominion strategy forums before, but the WDC is really cool.
here is the card im considering as my submission for this weeks contest


hope im doing it right

(also i know the colors are wrong, but ill fix that in a future ittiration)



does this work?

an alternate fireplace design suggested by Funfighter that i like


i think i'm settling for this version, version 8.0. so this is my submission

« Last Edit: December 12, 2020, 10:22:07 am by fika monster »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5076
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2800
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7781 on: December 12, 2020, 11:05:23 am »
+1

I think that card is reasonable.

However, formatting-wise, Villager and Action should be non-plural, and there should be less space after the vanilla boni.
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3126
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +4516
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7782 on: December 12, 2020, 11:51:33 am »
+8

The results

Here come my thoughts on the cards, ordered alphabetically by designer. I think I may have been a bit critical overall, please don't take that to mean that I didn't like your submission. I just try to provide helpful feedback.


Shoemaker - anordinaryman

Right away I like the setup rule and how it mirrors Baker. Adding a Villager at the start is a subtle but impactful change, as it makes double terminal openings much more viable. The card itself is very situational, but then that is fine for a $2. It works with other Coffers, with draw-to-X, and cards that care about discarding, I think these are enough scenarios in which it can be good.
Faithful Knight - Carline

A simple and maybe a bit obvious card to make here. I am not 100% sure whether you can get both Coffers and Villagers from a single play of this - it seems that way though. I think I would rather have you get just one type of token back on a single play, this would encourage getting more than 1 copy of this.

Overall, I think this is solid. It can always be a cantrip and is otherwise quite situational, but it allows for some fun plays. I do wonder a bit whether "convert any number of tokens" would not work better as an Event, but this card goes some way towards making me think otherwise.
Penance - D782802859

I don't know that this needs a "you may". The existing card that seems the most similar to this is Storyteller, so that will be my comparison. This also provides draw in exchange for buying power. With Storyteller, you get one extra card compared to this, but you need to already be able to generate the $. The -1 card token thing seems a little bit fiddly and easy to forget, not sure it needs to be there, there could be another penalty. of course I understand that then it would no longer qualify for this contest, but leaving a card design suboptimal just to meet some random criteria isn't a good call.

Otherwise I think it's a nice and probably balanced variant on Storyteller.
Fireplace - fika monster

Discarding a Fireplace gives +2 tokens of a kind, which is usually weaker than its cost (+2 Villagers is a $2, +2 Coffers is a $4, roughly). That's fine, since open discarding it's also nonterminal. and it does the swapping, which is quite neat. Overall I think this is a solid design; I worry a little bit about Villager spam as that takes some complexity out of the game, but I think the reaction can be quite fun even when it only reacts to itself. Good job on the first submission!
Trade Union - Fragasnap

I think +2 Villagers for $2 is fairly good. Usually Villages that don't draw are hard, but with this you are not required to play it before your draw card, so that makes it better. The "once per game" on an Action is a bit confusing as it's unclear whether it's once per copy of this or once in total (I assume the latter). I'm not sure about the token adding, it seems probably balanced, but somehow I am not excited for it. I guess having to slog through a couple of bad turns for the later benefit doesn't excite me.
Hostage - gambit05

This is a neat little one-shot, but I am not quite happy with the power level. I think it is best compared to Experiment. Compared to that, this one clumps the draw together (which I'd say is usually better), costs $1 more, gives you an extra Coffers and if you don't need it to be nonterminal gives you another token of choice on top. So I feel like overall, it compares a bit too favorably.
Commune - grep

I feel like this has a bit much going on. Swap all Coffers for Villagers, okay, interesting concept for a project. Then a Villager Pageant, that's kind of neat but I'm not sure why these things are slapped together. And finally a scoring thing, that I think is supposed to make the conversion more viable... I don't know, I feel like a project should do a specific thing and this is a bit all over the place, I suppose to make it relevant on more boards. And also, why does it cost Debt? I don't really see a reason for that.

And balance-wise, I think this is just going to completely warp the game on the right boards, say with Recruiter or Merchant Guild. That can be interesting, but I just wish it was a little more focused.
Quote
Greedy Fairy
cost $2 - Action
+2 Buys
Choose one: +1 Coffer; or remove any 2 tokens you have, to duplicate a token you have.
Greedy Fairy - majiponi

I think the design is solid. There are some wording peculiarities with "any token you have": At the start of the game, when you did not place your +1 card token, do you "have" it? And what does it mean to remove it then? Do you "have" your Journey token? These cases should probably be excluded. And do you "have" your -1 card token when it's on top of your deck?

While this needs further clarfication, the card is fine otherwise. +2 buys, +$1 is an option for Squire, and this is better than that, so even without other tokens it's going to be worth it. I am not sure how often you'll want to trade 2 tokens for one, especially at the cost of a weak terminal though, so I'm not sure the second option is going to see all that much use even when other tokens are available.
Quote
Heist Map
Treasure - $3
+$2, +<1>, +1 Buy
You may return this to its pile to pay all of your <_>. +1 Coffers per <_> you paid.
       

Heist Map -- NoMoreFun

This seems to be, in effect, a mix of Fool's Gold and Stockpile - you can play lots of them in a turn in order to get +$2, +1 Coffers, +1 buy each, but have to return one. It seems a bit strong - considering that the final Heist Map you play already finances itself. I think some numbers tweaking would be required to make this work. I'm also unsure about the use of Coffers here; I understand that was necessary to meet the criteria for the contest, but I'm wondering whether this might not be better off providing +$ per <_>.

And yeah, the interaction with Mountain Pass is completely broken. I don't usually complain too much about 2-card combos, but this just makes the game unplayable when both are in a Kingdom.

Temple Garden - silverspawn

This one sure got a bunch of upvotes, and I can definitely see the appeal. It's neat, it makes you wonder whether it's not too powerful only to then concluse that it's probably fine, which is admirable design. I liked this one a lot upon first reading.

now comes the bad stuff, of course. I thought about how this is actually going to play out, and there are two major issues. the first: if you have lots of draw and hardly ever make use to the conversion - it makes a Stockpiling strategy very viable, where you don't buy any Victory cards until the very last turn. It's not quite a megaturn deck, more like a Golden Deck, since you can play pretty much the same every turn until you pull the trigger. And it think by also being a card that you want lots of anyways, it makes these sorts of strategies a bit too viable.

The second problem I see is less on the strategic and more on the tactical side: it is going to be hard to decide what you want to do for the conversion. You need constant awareness of your deck and how likely you are to draw what you need, and since you are playing a bunch of these, I worry about intense analysis paralysis.

   
Cadet/Bosun-- spineflu

Disregarding Bosun completely, Cadet allows for instant Exile of Victory cards, I don't think that is a fun mechanic (and too powerful for a $3 cost). I would suggest adding a non-Victory clause.

I feel like you would usually just use Cadet to load Coppers onto your Caravel mat, and put one card there that you want to play lots of. Would be more interesting if Bosun only counted differently named cards on the Caravel mat. Bosun is very strong - it's baseline is play the set aside action three times, which is like King's Court-level strong (though you cannot Bosun a Bosun). I big issue is that getting one Bosun quickly snowballs, as the 3 Coffers lead you to quickly pick up more Bosuns.
Monolith - TheAgileBeast

I am assuming the text should read "convert all your VP tokens into debt", otherwise it would be quite the devastating attack. I think the nerf used here is interesting, but the card will lead to a rush too frequently, leaving one player with a strong advantage but a lot of game still to play, especially with Workshop variants. It might be worthwile to explore a version of this that runs out and returns itself to the supply at some point.
Trickster/Fool's Wager - Timinou

It's an interesting design space to explore for an attack, as things don't really mess with tokens so far. I think +2 Coffers at $4 is already quite decent value, so it doesn't matter that the attack isn't super powerful. What I'm more worried about is the number of decisions this creates. Every time an opponent, or you yourself play Chariot Race, you have to make a call of whether they would benefit more from VP or from Coffers. I would suggest either trying to get rid of the choices, or to make a single choice that affects the tokens they already have.

For Fool's Wager, I think the wording could be improved, get rid of the "when you play this" and maybe set aside tokens and remove them at the end of the turn in order to make tracking easier. This can be quite powerful, but is limited by being on the bottom of a split pile and there only being 5 copies. I think it's a decent design (and it works with Trickster's attack).
Leased Land/Work Order - Xen3k

Work Order seems nerfed a little bit too much I feel, not sure you need the Debt. The Coffers gain is rarely worth it now. And in situations where it will be worth it, it can be quite swingy (3/4 opening with Work Order in the first hand). Leased Land is interesting, it's roundabout like a Duchy+ if you have the Coffers. And it interacts nicely with Workshop variants as the Coffers conversion is on gain rather than on buy. But if Work Order is the only source of Coffers, effectively you pay $2 for 1 Coffers, making the effective price for Leased Land much higher.

So my thoughts are: Drop the Debt from Work Order and you have a quite interesting submission. As it stands, it's all a little bit too situational.



Settlement -- X-tra

This is a fairly simple concept, and there is value in that already. It can work on its own, but it gets particularly powerful with more VP token generators. My only complaint would be that it's a bit automatic, i.e. you almost always want to do the conversion, especially when you have a steady supply of tokens -  2 Coffers are just better than 1 VP (2 Coffers are 1/4 Province and thus 2 VP, put crudely).

Runners-up:
Settlement by X-tra
Fireplace by fika monster
Faithful Knight by Carline

Winner:
Shoemaker by anordinaryman
Logged
The quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5076
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2800
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7783 on: December 12, 2020, 12:26:49 pm »
0

now comes the bad stuff, of course. I thought about how this is actually going to play out, and there are two major issues. the first: if you have lots of draw and hardly ever make use to the conversion - it makes a Stockpiling strategy very viable, where you don't buy any Victory cards until the very last turn. It's not quite a megaturn deck, more like a Golden Deck, since you can play pretty much the same every turn until you pull the trigger. And it think by also being a card that you want lots of anyways, it makes these sorts of strategies a bit too viable.

The second problem I see is less on the strategic and more on the tactical side: it is going to be hard to decide what you want to do for the conversion. You need constant awareness of your deck and how likely you are to draw what you need

Hm, I agree with both of those, but they both sound like good things to me, especially the second. But I totally grant you that it's a matter of taste.

Congrats anordinaryman!
Logged

X-tra

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 353
  • Respect: +679
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7784 on: December 12, 2020, 02:14:49 pm »
0

Awesome judging! And in time too, unlike a certain someone (*angrily stares in a mirror*  :-[)...

This contest was pretty tough. But I'm glad people pulled through and submitted awesome ideas nonetheless. 'Grats to Anordinaryman for the win! And oh, I did like Temple Garden a lot, Silverspawn. :)
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 298
  • Respect: +366
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7785 on: December 12, 2020, 03:35:28 pm »
+1

Thanks for the nod, faust! I thought there were a lot of great submissions, and I'm honored you liked mine!

Contest #98: Feeling sideways
Some mechanics that originally felt wild and exotic became "normal" as we got used to them. For example, Durations and Events freely appear in expansions -- they seem almost as standard as Action cards now! Let's imagine a hypothetical world where all the sideways cards were introduced earlier on (say in the original Game), such that they are a standard "part of Dominion."

Design an Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for an existing expansion that does not currently have that type of sideways card in it.

Judging Criteria for the card-shaped thing:
  • It is well-balanced and fun.
  • It "fits" the expansion well. Acknowledging the main-theme and perhaps sub-themes for the expansion. For example, Seaside has sub-themes of top-of deck, your later turns, mats, condition gold-gaining, and more.
  • It "fits" Dominion well -- following the design principles of Donald X.
  • There is a meaningful reason for it to be that particularly side-wise card-shaped thing.

Submission Guidelines:
  • It will help me if you provide a brief explanation on why your card fits well in the expansion you designed it for
  • Please submit an image of your card as the first thing in a post. You do not need card art. It is easy for me to miss quoted text -- it is harder for me to miss images. If you want to comment on other people's cards in the same post as a submission (or updated submission), please put this after your submission in that same post.
  • Please edit submissions by writing a new post.

Some Rule Clarifications:
* You may design a card-shaped thing that comes with a non-sidewise actual card. (An event that you buy that gives out a card, or a card that can come with artifacts or give out states, etc).
* You may design a card-shaped thing for an expansion that has different kinds of card-shaped things. For example, you could design a State for Adventures (although make sure it wouldn't be better implemented with the tokens mechanic)
* You may design a card-shaped thing for an expansion that comes with different card-shaped things that are already in that expansion. (You may design an Event for Adventures that when purchased gives a State out).
* You may consider Cornucopia and Guilds to be the same expansion if you want to design for that since they are now sold together.
* Sideways is meant literally. You are primarily designing a card-shaped thing (Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way)

« Last Edit: December 12, 2020, 05:54:09 pm by anordinaryman »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5076
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2800
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7786 on: December 12, 2020, 03:58:52 pm »
0

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?
Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7787 on: December 12, 2020, 04:57:28 pm »
0

what are the core design principles that Donald has for dominions? as much as i love Secret history of dominion, i would prefer to not reread all of them

also, is there any list of the subthemes for every expansion?
« Last Edit: December 12, 2020, 04:59:23 pm by fika monster »
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5076
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2800
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7788 on: December 12, 2020, 05:07:07 pm »
+2

what are the core design principles that Donald has for dominions? as much as i love Secret history of dominion, i would prefer to not reread all of them

also, is there any list of the subthemes for every expansion?

Use the wiki to look up expansion themes.

Design Principles, on top of my head, no political cards, no long choices on attacks (so Rabble rather than Spy), attacks should produce resources (no Sea Hag), cards should never require specific other mechanics to make sense, no terminal +1 card, and aim for simplicity whenever possible. There are probably others I've missed.
Logged

scolapasta

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 553
  • Respect: +700
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7789 on: December 12, 2020, 05:12:18 pm »
0

Are sideway cards that require other sideway cards (both of which are not from that expansion) allowed?

e.g. an Event with an Artifact for, say, Alchemy
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

grrgrrgrr

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +312
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7790 on: December 12, 2020, 05:14:43 pm »
+3

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5076
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +2800
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7791 on: December 12, 2020, 05:34:26 pm »
+1

Ah, 'sideways' is meant literally. That makes sense. It read it as a standin for 'weird'.
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 298
  • Respect: +366
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7792 on: December 12, 2020, 05:53:01 pm »
+2

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.

Yes! My apologies for not making it clear. Thank you grrgrrgrr for the clarification. Both asterisk'ed cases are allowed. You can do States and Artifacts for Renaisance/Nocturne. If you do, make sure that it really makes sense that the card be a state and not and artifact and vice versa.

what are the core design principles that Donald has for dominions? as much as i love Secret history of dominion, i would prefer to not reread all of them

also, is there any list of the subthemes for every expansion?

Use the wiki to look up expansion themes.

Design Principles, on top of my head, no political cards, no long choices on attacks (so Rabble rather than Spy), attacks should produce resources (no Sea Hag), cards should never require specific other mechanics to make sense, no terminal +1 card, and aim for simplicity whenever possible. There are probably others I've missed.

Some of those can be violated, but they are good guidelines. I'd say political is a super strong guideline. I'd also add on
ards with massive amounts of text (like two more lines than any published card), Cards that are "strictly" better than another card, Cards that use some thing outside of the state of the game to determine things (a role of dice, physical dexterity, etc). None of those are likely to show up on actual dominion cards. There are cards that are fun fan designs that violate those rules, but they aren't Dominion-y.

The reason I wrote that rule is because I implicitly judge cards to fit in Dominion, and I wanted to explicit about that to be fair. If you design a super fun and balanced political card, it will not win this contest. Honestly, don't overthink this criteria, most fan submissions easily fit in easily.

As far as a list of sub-themes for expansions, an easy way to know is if your card interacts with multiple cards in the set, or it does something other cards in the set do variations of, it's probably on the sub-theme. There's some obvious ones, horse gaining in menagerie, boons in Nocturne, etc. Not sure if you care to dig around, but the last time I did a contest I did themed-cursers and from the truly amazing submissions there, you can see examples of cards that stick on theme for different early expansions. The contest starts on this page (http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18987.msg804962#msg804962)
« Last Edit: December 12, 2020, 05:57:43 pm by anordinaryman »
Logged

LittleFish

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 403
  • Respect: +182
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7793 on: December 12, 2020, 05:58:01 pm »
0

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.

Yes! My apologies for not making it clear. Thank you grrgrrgrr for the clarification. Both asterisk'ed cases are allowed. You can do States and Artifacts for Renaisance/Nocturne. If you do, make sure that it really makes sense that the card be a state and not and artifact and vice versa.
The only true difference is the name of card
Logged

anordinaryman

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 298
  • Respect: +366
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7794 on: December 12, 2020, 06:39:14 pm »
+1

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.

Yes! My apologies for not making it clear. Thank you grrgrrgrr for the clarification. Both asterisk'ed cases are allowed. You can do States and Artifacts for Renaisance/Nocturne. If you do, make sure that it really makes sense that the card be a state and not and artifact and vice versa.
The only true difference is the name of card

That's not the only true difference. Look at the design space of the two: There can be multiple copies of a state for each player. States can be double-sided. States can be given to other players. None of those are true for artifacts. Because of lost in the woods, it means that states can do anything an artifact can do (not the other way around), but it makes sense to me that a single-sided state where there is only one copy per player is probably actually an artifact. If you follow that reasoning, it also looks like there's the common breakdown that artifacts are good for you and states are bad for you.

You can implement many sidewise cards as a normal-ways duration card that stays in play. But you have to think about whether it's smoother to use the side-ways card. Often it is. Likewise, if you have a "state" that is one per player and it is positive to have it, it probably makes more sense to make it an artifact. And if you have an "artifact" that breaks convention by having one copy per player, well, you should probably make it a "state." It's the smoothest thing to do.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2020, 06:42:15 pm by anordinaryman »
Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7795 on: December 13, 2020, 04:24:05 am »
0

To make sure I understand, the task is to design a card that (a) belongs to a particular expansion, and (b) is on-theme but off-mechanic for that expansion? So a sifting duration card for hinterlands, or a variety-encouraging way for Cornucopia?

If I understand correctly, it is...

- An Event, Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for one of the pre-Advantures expansions
- A Landmark, State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Adventures
- A State, Project, Artifact, or Way for Empires
- An Event, Landmark, Project, Artifact (*), or Way for Nocturne
- An Event, Landmark, State (*), or Way for Renaissance
- A Landmark, State, Project or Artifact for Menagerie

(*) States and Artifacts are functionally similar, so not sure how that counts for Nocturne or Renaissance.

Yes! My apologies for not making it clear. Thank you grrgrrgrr for the clarification. Both asterisk'ed cases are allowed. You can do States and Artifacts for Renaisance/Nocturne. If you do, make sure that it really makes sense that the card be a state and not and artifact and vice versa.
The only true difference is the name of card

That's not the only true difference. Look at the design space of the two: There can be multiple copies of a state for each player. States can be double-sided. States can be given to other players. None of those are true for artifacts. Because of lost in the woods, it means that states can do anything an artifact can do (not the other way around), but it makes sense to me that a single-sided state where there is only one copy per player is probably actually an artifact. If you follow that reasoning, it also looks like there's the common breakdown that artifacts are good for you and states are bad for you.

You can implement many sidewise cards as a normal-ways duration card that stays in play. But you have to think about whether it's smoother to use the side-ways card. Often it is. Likewise, if you have a "state" that is one per player and it is positive to have it, it probably makes more sense to make it an artifact. And if you have an "artifact" that breaks convention by having one copy per player, well, you should probably make it a "state." It's the smoothest thing to do.

maybe a stupid question, but are we supposed to design an event or card for any artifacts or states we make? ie, "here the way to get the artifact/state"
Logged

majiponi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 691
  • Respect: +600
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7796 on: December 13, 2020, 05:13:15 am »
+1



For Dominion.  There is no "2nd player" without this, but this lets you gain the most vps even if you have 0% chance of winning.
« Last Edit: December 13, 2020, 10:15:31 am by majiponi »
Logged

fika monster

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 271
  • Respect: +236
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7797 on: December 13, 2020, 08:31:28 am »
0

A card im considering submiting for this contest, im probably submiting another one. this one is obviously "nocturne" themed

Logged

anordinaryman

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 298
  • Respect: +366
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7798 on: December 13, 2020, 10:46:14 am »
+1


maybe a stupid question, but are we supposed to design an event or card for any artifacts or states we make? ie, "here the way to get the artifact/state"

Yes, please. Otherwise I don’t know how it is used.

My apologies everyone. Clearly I did not make this contest very clear! In my head I considered this to be a clear and interesting contest—perhaps it is not so. In any case I very much look forward to seeing the creative submissions everyone comes up with.




For Dominion.  There is no "2nd player" without this, but this lets you gain the most vps even if you have 0% chance of winning.


To clarify, is a league point in the context of the online dominion league where whoever has the most points goes up a bracket (or wins if in the top bracket)?
« Last Edit: December 13, 2020, 10:50:04 am by anordinaryman »
Logged

Xen3k

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 295
  • Respect: +359
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest Thread
« Reply #7799 on: December 13, 2020, 11:10:31 am »
+2



Quote
Way of the Vermin
Way
Trash this.
Each other player gains a Ruins.
If this is the first Action card played this turn, gain a Spoils.

A Way for Dark Ages. It is a self trashing conditional Spoils gainer that hands out Ruins, like a one-shot Marauder. I am not sure how good of an idea this is as it definitely can snow-ball, but seeing as it is a counter to itself it won't devolve into a slog straight away. Villages will be highly sought after as using the Way will eat up Actions. I think of this as more of a tactical Way as you want to be the first to trash a particular card to get the Spoils reward, but handing a Ruins to other players means they will get the Spoils from that card and send Ruins back your way. I would want to play test it to see if it is actually fun, but I like the idea. Feedback is more than welcome!

Edit: Changed the Spoils gain condition. It is now contingent on using the Way first and should prevent players from feeling like they are missing out. Could promote Big Money a bit more than usual, but you still need Actions to use the way.

Quote
Old Version


Quote
Way of the Vermin
Way
Trash this.
If there wasn't a copy of this in the Trash, gain a Spoils.
Each other player gains a Ruins.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2020, 12:29:03 pm by Xen3k »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 310 311 [312] 313 314 ... 327  All
 

Page created in 0.115 seconds with 21 queries.