Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[scolapasta]

Hi all,

I recently discovered the Weekly Design contest and I love it! As I posted there, I've always wanted to come up with custom cards, but have struggled on where to start. Having the weekly design content to focus my ideas on a specific concept is fantastic! And to get feedback on top of that?? Wonderful!

Being new to this, I don't expect to win very often, but I would love to continue getting feedback and tweaking the cards until they work well. So this thread is for that. I'll post both cards from the contests and others I come up with and anyone interested in helping improve my ideas is welcome to comment.

This top post will contain the current version of all the cards.


Worshippers, a new type of token that you can "spend" during your Clean up phase:

At the start of your Clean-up phase, you may remove tokens from this to trash a card from your hand or one you have in play for each token removed.

Benefits of Worshippers (compared to just trashing a card):

• you can play a Copper (or other card) on the same turn that you trash it
• you can hold on to the trashing if you don't have anything current to trash
• the corollary to that is you can stock up on Worshippers as a defense to gaining Junk
• a trasher like Apse Chapel can effectively trash itself, when you're done with it

Cards that give Worshippers:

Apse Chapel, a Chapel variant
Cloister, an Action-Night that trashes in the day, and gathers Worshippers at night
Archbishop, a "Grand" Bishop
Congregation / Blessing, TfB for Worshippers
Occult Dealer, a card gives out one of type of each "spendable" token



Card-shaped things that care about Worshippers:

Tithe, an Event that trades a Worshipper for a $1
Mausoleum, a landmark that gives VPs for Worshippers
Convent, a Project that gives out a Worshipper when you gain or trash a Victory card
Chalice, an Artifact with a Bishop-like effect

]

FAQ:

• At the start of your Clean-up phase means before you discard any cards.
• Only use Title and Mausoleum in Kingdoms that games that give Worshippers.


Overpay for Tokens

Developing Village, overpay for Villagers
Endowment, overpay for Coffers
Graveyard, overpay for Worshippers




Challenge Cards:

Mystical Chest:, an Fate-Doom card
Cabal:, an TR variant that also works on Night cards
Stockpile:, a cheap "reloadable" Gold
Collector:, an Improve variant, with Magic Lamp as an Heirloom
Coven:, an event that allows you to turn Action into a Curser




Changelog:
v0.1 Worshippers, Apse Chapel, Archbishop, Parish - initial*
v0.1 Undercroft - initial*
v0.2 Worshippers - changed wording to "At the start of your Clean-up phase" to be more clear
v0.2 Archbishop - added additional Worshipper
v0.2 Parish - made more interesting by counting Worshippers
v0.2 Cloister (formerly Undercroft) - made into Action-Night, so it trashes cards now
v0.3 Graveyard (formerly Parish) - back to the initial version (with an additional Worshipper), but with new name
v0.3 Cloister - Night now always gets exactly +1 Worshipper
v0.2 Mystical Chest - initial (**)
v0.1 Blessing - initial
v0.3 Archbishop - 1 less VP, 1 less Worshipper, but now takes the Chalice
v0.1 Congregation - initial
v0.2 Blessing - now a reserve card that's not in the supply
v0.1 Title - initial
v0.1 Mausoleum - initial
v0.1 Convent - initial
v0.1 Chalice - initial
v0.3 Mystical Chest - fixed background color
v0.1 Occult Dealer - initial
v0.2 Congregation - loses +1 Card; gains blessing to hand
v0.3 Blessing - now an action - reserve card
v0.2 Occult Dealer - changed cost to $5
v0.2 Convent - changed cost to $3 and also gains Worshipper when trashing Victory cards
v0.1 Developing Village - initial
v0.1 Endowment - initial
v0.4 Graveyard - now overpay for Worshippers
v0.2 Developing Village - added +1 Action if you trade, +1 Card if you don't and the trade has to be differently named
v0.3 Worshippers - wording change; now, if you spend a Worshipper, you must trash a card
v0.3 Convent - dropped cost to $2
v0.4 Archbishop - changed Chalice taking to be conditional; removed no Coppers clause
v0.2 Chalice - now once per turn
v0.2 Cabal - initial (***)
v0.2b Stockpile - initial (***)
v0.3 Collector - initial (***)
v0.2d Coven - initial (***)
v0.4 Collector - added + 1 card
v0.3 Coven - lowered cost to $5 and removed non-Attack

(*) v0.1 of Worshippers, Archbishop, Parish, and Undercroft were only posted in the Weekly Design Contest thread
(**) v0.1 of Mystical Chest was never posted - see secret history for reasons why
(***) previous versions of these cards posted in Weekly Challenge thread

[scolapasta]

Here I'll post my "Secret History" for these cards and ideas, in case anyone is interested in the evolution and reasoning they each went through to get to their current state:


Worshippers / Cards that use Worshippers:

• I considered having Worshippers trash from just your hand or just in play. But I prefer trashing either, as long as the cards are balanced.
• Once I got the idea for the new token, my first idea was the Chapel variant. I then tried to think of names with religious connotations: Archbishop should obviously be a "Grand" Bishop, and Parish a Victory card (Parish has since been removed).
• I considered trying Apse chapel as +3 Worshippers (for $3?), but (with feedback help) decided that was too strong.
• Parish as a card that cared about Worshippers didn't scale well, so that is now a Landmark, Mausoleum (while its original concept became an earlier version of Graveyard).
• Cloister was originally just a Night card that rewarded other trashing. It then gained "daytime" trashing, but was still problematic. This version is simpler, and hopefully more useful.
• Archbishop originally just gave $, VPs, and Worshippers, but was worrisome due to the unconditional VPs. Now it takes the Chalice which has a Bishop-like effect to reward using those Worshippers to trash cards. Thematically, the Archbishops are vying for who gets to be the "Pope" and have more power.
• Blessing is an attempt at TfB for Worshippers, since standard TfB isn't possible with the deferred trashing. It began as a 1 shot pure Reaction, but was useless in non Worshipper games, so moved out of the supply and is now only in games with Congregation.
• Occult Dealer seemed like a no brainer - now that we have 3 types of spendable tokens, why not a simple card that gives one of each?
• Mausoleum is Parish as a Landmark, so it's no longer tied to a card that can be split unevenly; i.e. everyone gets the opportunity for the same benefit.
• Convent is the parallel to Academy and Guildhall.


Overpay for Tokens:
• The guiding principle was to continue the synergies between: Victory cards to Worshippers, Action cards to Villagers, Treasure card to Coffers.
• Graveyard had started as plain "on gain" but became the first of the "Overpay for Token" cards.
• Developing Village has some DNA from both Develop and Village.


Challenge cards:

Mystical Chest:
• v0.1 was never posted in the forum. It had +1 Action and you received a Boon instead of $3 at the start of your next turn (cost was only $2). But two things changed my mind quickly:
- This quote, from another thread: "The important thing is, most cards that do Boons either give you some other benefit you’re really playing it for..." http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=18109.msg740687#msg740687
- By receiving the 2nd Boon, it guaranteed the other player would get a Hex if they played one, which didn't seem right; you shouldn't know at the time of playing, if you will be hurt by it or not.
• I considered a version where you immediately receive the Hex when the other player received their Boon; that version simplified the card text considerably, but I prefer how this version lets you choose the less harmful Hex and possibly forces your opponent into a tough decision - if you've set aside Misery, for example, do they play a card that gives them a 2nd boon but may not reveal as strong a Hex?

Cabal:
• Cabal started with the idea of a TR for Night cards. By itself, that was not compelling enough since you could usually just buy a 2nd copy of a good Night card (as they are not terminal). So it because Action-Night, and you can TR either an Action or Night card, or save it for next turn (and it can't be drawn dead).

Stockpile:
• I went through several iterations to get to the initial posyed version. First it was just a one treasure card, earning tokens via overpay - it started weak and tokens made it stronger; or you could remove tokens to make it weak again, but with a strong one time bonus. But the text got very tiny, so I tried a split pile. It was not clear to me, however, if it was ever worth buying the 2nd card to trigger the bonus. So it came back to one card again, until I realized I could reverse the token effect - start strong and get weaker. I first tried that with a dependent card to restock it, until I realized how silly that was, and it could just have the option to restock itself.

Collector:
• Inspired by Magic Lamp, I started with setting aside cards for which you already had a copy in play.  It was too weak that way, and also simpler to just let you set aside any card. Trashing first happened when you play, then moved to start of clean up (to allow for treasures and night cards), and then moved again to end of turn (in order to have a minor penalty/bonus for setting aside, that set aside cards may miss a shuffle).

Coven:
• This started out as a "cursed" token that hurt everyone equally; but to be more in line with the other Adventurers tokens (putting them on a card makes that card better for you than for other players), it is now a "cursing token" that changes your cards from that pile into cursers.

[scolapasta]

This week's challenge is "Make me skip chapel!" The idea I came up with involved a new mechanic, Worshipper tokens, so in addition to the contest entry, I came up with several cards to demonstrate how it could work:

First, we had Coffers, tokens that you "spend" in your Buy Phase; then Villagers introduced tokens "spent" during your Action phase. Now let's welcome: Worshippers, a new type of token that you can "spend" during your Clean up phase:

At the start of your Clean-up phase, remove tokens from here: for each token removed, you may trash a card from your hand or one you have in play.

Benefits of Worshippers compared to just trashing a card:

• you can play a Copper (or other card) on the same turn that you trash it
• you can hold on to the trashing if you don't have anything current to trash
• the corollary to that is you can stock up on Worshippers as a defense to gaining Junk
• a trasher like Apse Chapel can effectively trash itself, when you're done with it

Cards that use Worshippers:

Apse Chapel, a Chapel variant
Parish, a Victory card that counts Worshippers
Cloister, an Action-Night that trashes in the day, and gathers Worshippers at night
Archbishop, a "Grand" Bishop



FAQ:

• At the start of your Clean-up phase means before you discard any cards.


Questions:

Generally, of course, are these cards balanced?

Apse Chapel: I keep going back and forth on whether this should be +2 or +3 Worshippers. While I think +3 has a better chance of locking in the "skip Chapel" vote, it feels too strong. In lieu of extensive play testing, please let me know: is +2 Worshippers enough for you to consider skipping Chapel? Or does it need +3? (and if so, at what cost?)

Parish: the original was just boring and really just a token Victory card (no pun intended). This new version is more interesting (and thematically better - the more Worshippers you have, the more valuable your Parishes), but it could also well be broken. If so, help me fix it! (higher cost? more worshippers per VP? or is the idea generally broken?)

[Kudasai]

Apse Chapel: I think +2 Worshipers is probably best as these tokens seem quite strong. A good card to compare this to would be Ratcatcher.

Apse Chapel is the same cost, provides double the trashing potential, most likely has a bigger card pool to trash from, but is a terminal Action. I think +2 Worshipers is fine if not a bit too strong. Of course talking about what Chapel-esque cards should cost is tricky as Chapel is artificially priced low.

[segura]

Worshippers seem most similar to Monastery to me. Like with Monastery you trash at the end of your turn, so it is good with draw (and in the middlegame with junkers, here Ratcatcher can frequently miss your junk), and like Monastery it does not hurt your economy.
The advantage of Monastery is that it is nonterminal. The advantage of Apse Chapel is that it trashes on average more cards than Monastery (I think that you trash on average 1 card more often 3 cards), that you can save the Worshippers and that you can use them to trash the Apse Chapel itself.

[scolapasta]

Of course talking about what Chapel-esque cards should cost is tricky as Chapel is artificially priced low.

Right. Trying to create a card that is better than an overpowered card, but doesn't itself break the game is quite the challenge!

I'm glad to see some consensus on +2 Worshippers being the right place to have Apse Chapel at (play testing may reveal if that's too weak / strong).

(I did also consider having a combination of trashing and Worshippers, but that seemed less "pure" for what I felt should be a "pure" card)

[scolapasta]

What about the other cards?

Do Archbishop and Cloister seem balanced and interesting?

And Parish? I'm fairly unsure about this one. The concept would probably be better as a a Landmark*, though in a game without cards that give out Worshippers it would be useless. What's the general consensus on Landmarks, Event, Projects that involve mechanics that won't be in every game? The only official ones I can think of are Tomb, and Sewers, in games with no trashing.

* though would need a new name, as Parish is clearly a Victory card

Similarly, I had the idea of an Event that would only work in Worshipper games. A couple of possibilities:

Tithe - Event - $0
Once per turn: +1 Buy. Remove a Worshipper from your Worshipper Mat. If you do, +$1.

(depending on strength, possible alternatives are: 2 Worshippers per $1, or remove the "once per turn")

[Gazbag]

I really like Apse Chapel, I played a few quick solo games just see how it generally plays out in the early turns and I really liked it. Regarding the cost, I think it basically comes down to how you want people to be able to open. I think $2, $3 and $4 are all defensible prices for it. Personally I think a card that trashes 2 cards at such a low cost to tempo as this is a bit much for $2 so I'd go with $3 or $4 depending on whether I wanted double Apse Chapel opening to be a thing. I know this was designed with the chapel contest in mind, but I'm ignoring that because I don't think designing cards around Chapel is a good way to go about it.

I don't like the new version of Parish, I'm not convinced that kind of token counting Victory card can really work. I also think that Worshippers are a particularly bad token for this because they naturally become useless after you run out of bad cards to trash, unlike Coffers or Villagers. The problem is that it plays dramatically differently when there are other Worshipper cards out. With no other Worshipper cards it's a version of the classic Victory card that counts itself, which no one has been able to make work aside from Castles sort of. Donald X touches upon his attempt at the idea in the Duke section of Intrigue's secret history here.  With a card like Apse Chapel in the kingdom it probably just becomes broken as you can stockpile worshippers for massive amounts of VP. You can try to reduce this by making the rate worse, but then you'll just be making it useless when there's no other Worshippers around so I'm not really sure what the fix is.

I preferred the original as a twist on Cemetery, although I think it could have given 2 Worshippers. So it'd be like Cemetery but can only trash 2 cards, but with the benefits of the trashing being in the form of Worshippers.

I don't find Cloister particularly compelling myself, rewarding you for trashing by giving you more trashing is weird to me. Sewers is a bit different as I see that as improving your trashing cards, rather than rewarding you for lining up your trashing card with another card.

I'd be careful with Archbishop giving +2vp unconditionally, it has the danger of leading to never ending games. It might be expensive enough that this doesn't become much of a problem, but I'd keep an eye on it. I always enjoyed how expensive trashers like Forge made you play a bit differently than the cheaper trashers so I like that about Archbishop.

I have a few vague ideas of things I think would be cool to do with Worshippers, but I won't share them unless you want me to.

[scolapasta]

Thanks for the well thought out feedback!

I really like Apse Chapel, I played a few quick solo games just see how it generally plays out in the early turns and I really liked it. Regarding the cost, I think it basically comes down to how you want people to be able to open. I think $2, $3 and $4 are all defensible prices for it. Personally I think a card that trashes 2 cards at such a low cost to tempo as this is a bit much for $2 so I'd go with $3 or $4 depending on whether I wanted double Apse Chapel opening to be a thing. I know this was designed with the chapel contest in mind, but I'm ignoring that because I don't think designing cards around Chapel is a good way to go about it.

I'm glad you got some play testing in! I plan on trying some, hopefully this week, with both Chapel and Apse Chapel on the board, and have Player 1 buy one and a Player 2 the other.

While I overall agree with not designing around Chapel, in this case since it's specifically meant to be a Chapel variant (not just for the challenge, but more generally), I'm ok with it.

I don't like the new version of Parish, I'm not convinced that kind of token counting Victory card can really work. I also think that Worshippers are a particularly bad token for this because they naturally become useless after you run out of bad cards to trash, unlike Coffers or Villagers. The problem is that it plays dramatically differently when there are other Worshipper cards out. With no other Worshipper cards it's a version of the classic Victory card that counts itself, which no one has been able to make work aside from Castles sort of. Donald X touches upon his attempt at the idea in the Duke section of Intrigue's secret history here.  With a card like Apse Chapel in the kingdom it probably just becomes broken as you can stockpile worshippers for massive amounts of VP. You can try to reduce this by making the rate worse, but then you'll just be making it useless when there's no other Worshippers around so I'm not really sure what the fix is.

I preferred the original as a twist on Cemetery, although I think it could have given 2 Worshippers. So it'd be like Cemetery but can only trash 2 cards, but with the benefits of the trashing being in the form of Worshippers.

Agreed - the more I thought about it, the more I felt it didn't work. You went beyond that and provided concrete reasons why, so thanks! I think the closest thing to a fix (mentioned previously) would be to make the concept a Landmark:

Mausoleum - Landmark
When scoring 1VP per 2 Worshippers you have (round down).

You'd, of course, only use this in games with a card that gave Worshippers, so is it even worth creating this card? (if I were officially publishing, I would not; but as a fan card to try out when I play these cards with friends - why not?)

Cemetery is an apt comparison. I can see bringing it back in that form, but with a more appropriate name:

Graveyard - Victory - $4
Worth 2VP. When you gain this, +2 Worshippers.

Graveyard is to Cemetery like Apse Chapel is to Chapel.

Now still just need an idea for Parish, which wants to be a Victory Card.

I don't find Cloister particularly compelling myself, rewarding you for trashing by giving you more trashing is weird to me. Sewers is a bit different as I see that as improving your trashing cards, rather than rewarding you for lining up your trashing card with another card.

Good point about Sewers and the difference between a Project and this card. Not sure yet if I'll keep this around or try to tweak some more. Maybe find a way to make the day part more compelling, and the Night directly just give you +1 Worshipper?

I'd be careful with Archbishop giving +2vp unconditionally, it has the danger of leading to never ending games. It might be expensive enough that this doesn't become much of a problem, but I'd keep an eye on it. I always enjoyed how expensive trashers like Forge made you play a bit differently than the cheaper trashers so I like that about Archbishop.

Over the weekend, I reread the Fan Card Creation Guide, and saw the flaws here when I got to Common Pitfall #19: Cards that allow unlimited accumulation of victory tokens.

So yes, this needs to be changed! In trying to make this analogous to Bishop, the issue was that Worshippers don't trash immediately. I might try something like "While this is in play, when you trash a card, you may discard this. If you do +1VP per $2 it costs (round down)."

(this creates a new problem, of two below the line clauses, which may not be worth the trouble - are there any other cards that have two below the line clauses?)

I have a few vague ideas of things I think would be cool to do with Worshippers, but I won't share them unless you want me to.

Please!

I think there's plenty of space for new cards that use Worshippers. I think the mechanic and my first card, Apse Chapel, are worthwhile, but as a new designer, I've struggled a little with finding the right concept and/or balance on these other cards.

So have at it!

[segura]

I'd be careful with Archbishop giving +2vp unconditionally, it has the danger of leading to never ending games. It might be expensive enough that this doesn't become much of a problem, but I'd keep an eye on it. I always enjoyed how expensive trashers like Forge made you play a bit differently than the cheaper trashers so I like that about Archbishop.

Over the weekend, I reread the Fan Card Creation Guide, and saw the flaws here when I got to Common Pitfall #19: Cards that allow unlimited accumulation of victory tokens.

So yes, this needs to be changed! In trying to make this analogous to Bishop, the issue was that Worshippers don't trash immediately. I might try something like "While this is in play, when you trash a card, you may discard this. If you do +1VP per $2 it costs (round down)."

I am not so sure; my hunch is that Archbishop is far less crazy than Goons

Unconditional +2VP is new and potentially problematic but as the card yields Coins you will likely still buy something and drive the game towards the end. Suppose you have a deck with 5 Archbishops and 4 Villages. Will you keep it running and make 10VPs per turn or will you green? There is no way to answer this theoretically, best is to just set up a Kingdom and playtest it solo from this situation with one player greening / adding other engine pieces and the non-player just making 10VPs per turn.

Instead of the unconditional VPs you could also do something like Goons but for trashing: "While this is in play, when you trash a card, +1VP." Given that you likely already want to / have to trash before you gain Archbishops, it is unlikely to become very crazy (you have to gain new stuff, draw into it and the Archbishops to keep your VP engine running).

[scolapasta]

I got a chance to play test a little last night - in 3 games, Chapel beat Apse Chapel 2-1. That said, I'm still pleased with those results because:
• the Chapel player was Player 1 all three games.
• the two games Chapel won were close, while the game Apse Chapel won was not.
• in one of Chapel's win, Chapel got a 5-2 split.

(that and Apse Chapel got Runner up in the contest - woohoo!)

For the other cards, I updated the initial post with Graveyard replacing Parish, and a simpler Cloister. I still need to work on Archbishop as I mocked up a version with "while this is in play" and it was too busy.




Looking forward to seeing other's ideas for these tokens!

[scolapasta]

While we wait for the next contest, let's revisit last week's ("Feeling Vulnerable") entry:

You find a mysterious chest. What luck! After carefully opening it, you'll get some Gold, but you may have also triggered a trap!:




Notes / Questions:

Having you set aside hexes makes sure you're not super hexed in multi player games (or even by a single opponent who gets multiple boons). An alternative way of providing this protection is: "While this is in play, when another player receives a Boon, if you haven’t already, receive a Hex."

Which is better?

The original way adds a neat dynamic that you may get to pick the weaker of multiple Hexes (and may have the effect of forcing your opponent into a tough decision - if you've set aside Misery, for example, do they play a card that gives them a 2nd boon and may reveal as strong a Hex?).

The second way simplifies the card text considerably (since the "while this is in play" is when you receive the Hex, that whole clause can be removed from the "on play").

[Jack Rudd]

This would be an awesome card to use Procession on.

[scolapasta]

This would be an awesome card to use Procession on.

Sure. This is also true of most of the other cards that were part of that week's contest, by virtue of the challenge requirements.

Unless someone feels strongly that the simpler text is worth it, I think I'll keep the current version, as I like the idea of getting to select which hex you want to receive, and possibly forcing the other player(s) to think about whether it's worth getting another boon that could also give you a weaker hex.

[scolapasta]

Inspired by this week's contest*, here's a one-shot reaction for Worshippers, an attempt at TfB, since standard TfB isn't possible with the deferred trashing:



(*) this is not my entry, since it's exclusively for Worshippers, though my actual entry is purposefully written to work with them (as it deals with all tokens that you can "spend"). I'll post that one here once the contest is over.


Notes / Questions:

In an earlier post I asked, "What's the general consensus on Landmarks, Event, Projects that involve mechanics that won't be in every game? The only official ones I can think of are Tomb, and Sewers, in games with no trashing."

I can now expand that question to all cards in general, since this card is useless without Worshippers.

One concern is that it could be used in attacks as a stop card.

Outside of specifying rules that say "only use with other cards that give Worshippers", I could make it part of a split pile, though I don't like the thought of only having 5 of them. (or possible only 5 of the top card)

How have others handled similar situations?

[mail-mi]

Blessing should give worshippers somehow, because otherwise it's completely useless in a game without worshippers.

[scolapasta]

Blessing should give worshippers somehow, because otherwise it's completely useless in a game without worshippers.

Yes, that's what I was asking about in the "Notes / Questions" section. I also have an Event and a Landmark I'm planning on adding soon (both of which I posted about earlier in the thread) that would be useless in games without worshippers.

I see these options:
1. Change the card to give Worshippers.
2. Have card be part of a split pile and the other card give Worshippers.
3. Do nothing; allow a card or card shaped object to be could be useless in some games.
4. State in rules that this card should not be used in games without Worshippers.
5. Don't design the card.

In an ideal world, the best option is either #1 or #2. In this case, I can't think of a good way to do #1 without changing my purpose for the card. And this feels like a card that should have its own pile, so #2 doesn't work either. (and couldn't even be an option for the Event or Landmark)

#4, while not eloquent, seems strictly better than #3.

So between #4 and #5, I'm leaning towards 4 (note that's what's in the FAQ in the top post), because I think it add an interesting dynamic when used in games with Worshippers.

If this were part of an official expansion, I'd revisit. But as a fan card, I don't see a big issue.

[Kudasai]

Inspired by this week's contest*, here's a one-shot reaction for Worshippers, an attempt at TfB, since standard TfB isn't possible with the deferred trashing:



(*) this is not my entry, since it's exclusively for Worshippers, though my actual entry is purposefully written to work with them (as it deals with all tokens that you can "spend"). I'll post that one here once the contest is over.


Notes / Questions:

In an earlier post I asked, "What's the general consensus on Landmarks, Event, Projects that involve mechanics that won't be in every game? The only official ones I can think of are Tomb, and Sewers, in games with no trashing."

I can now expand that question to all cards in general, since this card is useless without Worshippers.

One concern is that it could be used in attacks as a stop card.

Outside of specifying rules that say "only use with other cards that give Worshippers", I could make it part of a split pile, though I don't like the thought of only having 5 of them. (or possible only 5 of the top card)

How have others handled similar situations?

I think this would work best as an Event:

+1 Worshipper and during your next Clean-up, when you trash a card, you may gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

Slightly more powerful so it may need to cost more, but it essentially does the same thing. Hopefully I'm not missing some function here that only works as a card.

[scolapasta]

I think this would work best as an Event:

+1 Worshipper and during your next Clean-up, when you trash a card, you may gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

Slightly more powerful so it may need to cost more, but it essentially does the same thing. Hopefully I'm not missing some function here that only works as a card.

It's not so much that it loses functionality, but that it changes the purpose of the card, which is to provide TfB for any Worshippers. If it were this event, it always provides you with the Worshipper to use. Additionally, you couldn't get this now, use it later.

That said, I thought of another option:
6. Have card not be in the supply, and create another card that can gain them.

(this option still won't work for landmarks or some events, see next post)

So, let's see if that'll work. In the process, I'm trying something that I haven't seen before: make Blessing a pure Reserve card (making it stronger, as it doesn't now have to be in your hand):




Notes / Questions:

Does a pure Reserve card work? I think so as it seems to work the same as a pure Reaction would, without having to be in your hand. Congregation gains it directly to your Tavern mat, and then when it's called, it returns directly to its pile.

One thing I lose from the original design is the finite aspect - since they were trashed, then you could only "bless" 10 cards (assuming a game without trash gainers). I don't know if that was an essential part of the design, and having infinite is possible more fair for 3+ player games.

I put the "gain to your tavern mat" on Congregation, though I could have put "This is gained to your tavern mat" on Blessing instead. Barring other cards, I don't think this makes a difference.

I changed the wording from "when you remove a Worshipper token from its mat" to "When you trash a card during your Clean-up phase" (thanks for the idea, Kudasai). I thought this was cleaner - though it does make it stronger, as you could spend Worshippers with Sewers, and call 2 Blessings (one on each trashed card).

Congregation is priced at $3 in order to enable double Congregation opens. Is this too strong? Should it be $4 instead?

[scolapasta]

So, I've mentioned in some previous posts that I've been working on some Card-shaped things that care about Worshippers. Here they are:



How do you get Chalice? Welcome the new Archbishop:




Notes / Questions:

As discussed in the last several posts, Tithe and Mausoleum, are useless in games without Worshippers. While it felt important to try to fix that for a Kingdom card (and there were additional ways to do this), it feels less so for Events and Landmarks. Regardless, the FAQ will state "don't use in games without Worshippers".

Tithe: 1 Worshipper for $1 feels like the right ratio, similar to Borrow. I've also considered allowing you to do this for more than 1, but that seems too strong.

Mausoleum: This is Parish as a Landmark, so it's no longer tied to a card that can be split unevenly; i.e. everyone gets the opportunity for the same benefit. I'm unsure about this ratio, especially consider Tomb gives 1 VP per trashed card. (so in games with both, you would *always* want to spend your Worshippers) Should it be 1VP per Worshipper?

Convent: This is the parallel to Academy and Guildhall. The synergy is that it clears up a spot in your deck for your new Victory card.

Chalice / Archbishop: The idea here was to still allow Archbishop to gain VPs from Worshipper trashed cards (like with Bishop). It's more powerful in that it can get VPs for multiple cards, but it can be taken away from you. And by using Chalice, I could keep the text on this card simpler. I did have to drop to 1 VP and back down to 1 Worshipper to make this feel balanced.

Thematically, I like that the Archbishops are vying for who gets to be the "Pope" and have more power.

One possible change I'm still considering is to make the Chalice taking be conditional. Possible something like Swashbuckler, "if you have at least 2 Worshippers". Not sure if it's actually needed (would it help or hurt the balance), but I think it would fit the theme even more.

[Kudasai]

Congregation is priced at $3 in order to enable double Congregation opens. Is this too strong? Should it be $4 instead?

Some cool stuff coming out of this thread! I wish I had more time on my hands to respond to it all, but for now I'll just comment on the new Congregation/Blessing cards.

I might be mistaken, but I believe a forced cantrip card trashers should be priced around $4.5. "+1 Card, +1 Action, Trash a card from your hand." Given that Congregation does not force you to trash a card, trashes at a time when your trashing window is potentially bigger, and it can set you up for an on-demand remodel, I think you're easily looking at a very good $5 cost. Trying it out at $6 might be a safe place to start, but it then in a way becomes stronger as you could "Bless" your Congregations into Provinces.

All in all I think this is a cool concept and it's a nice, clean remodel variant. The pure Reserve certainly seems to work too and adds a nice interaction with other trashers. Another reason I think this should cost $6 as reaching that price point needs to be carefully considered when trashing down.

Also, Congregation reads "+1 Action, +1 Card, ..." when it should be the other way around!

[Kudasai]

Okay, I've got time for another quick comment. This time on Archbishop/Chalice:

So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card. Given the theme of trashing it would be nice to see something along those lines.

Also, I'm curious what the no Copper in play clause is getting at? I get that it makes Archbishop harder to gain, but I'm just curious if there is a specific reason you choose this condition to meet.

[Gubump]

So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card.

Treasurer does.

[scolapasta]

So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card.

Treasurer does.

Well, the condition is that you choose that option, i.e. you don't necessarily take the Key every time you play it (though you can).

[Commodore Chuckles]

Convent seems pretty useless, to be honest. By the time you're greening, you don't really care if your deck has junk in it. The crucial time to trash is in the beginning, way before you're buying Victory cards. The main edge cases would be Mill or if you want to get rid of some Curses.

[scolapasta]

Congregation is priced at $3 in order to enable double Congregation opens. Is this too strong? Should it be $4 instead?

Some cool stuff coming out of this thread! I wish I had more time on my hands to respond to it all, but for now I'll just comment on the new Congregation/Blessing cards.

I might be mistaken, but I believe a forced cantrip card trashers should be priced around $4.5. "+1 Card, +1 Action, Trash a card from your hand." Given that Congregation does not force you to trash a card, trashes at a time when your trashing window is potentially bigger, and it can set you up for an on-demand remodel, I think you're easily looking at a very good $5 cost. Trying it out at $6 might be a safe place to start, but it then in a way becomes stronger as you could "Bless" your Congregations into Provinces.

All in all I think this is a cool concept and it's a nice, clean remodel variant. The pure Reserve certainly seems to work too and adds a nice interaction with other trashers. Another reason I think this should cost $6 as reaching that price point needs to be carefully considered when trashing down.

Also, Congregation reads "+1 Action, +1 Card, ..." when it should be the other way around!

A lot of excellent points. I really wasn't sure what to price it at, but clearly 3 is too cheap.

Looking though some official cards for comparables, I see:

Junk Dealer - $5 - also gives $1
Upgrade - $5 - Cantrip TfB+1
Sauna - $4 - Cantrip - doesn't always trash, but often and can play Avanto for free
Hideout - $4 - gives an extra action, but also a curse if the card you trash is a victory card

I also already have Archbishop at $6*, and was trying to keep most Worshipper-giving cards lower. (though in this case it may still be OK since you're likely getting these for the TfB). And I agree, not sure if I want to enable the TfB to Provinces.

So I may lean towards 5 instead of 6.

Another option is to remove the +1 Card (or the +1 Action).

Is this more interesting as an expensive cantrip or as a cheaper +1 Action?

Also, when you say "adds a nice interaction with other trashers" are there any others besides Sewers? I can't think of what else can trash during Clean-up (and Sewers only because of Worshippers).

[scolapasta]

Okay, I've got time for another quick comment. This time on Archbishop/Chalice:

So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card. Given the theme of trashing it would be nice to see something along those lines.

Also, I'm curious what the no Copper in play clause is getting at? I get that it makes Archbishop harder to gain, but I'm just curious if there is a specific reason you choose this condition to meet.

Huh, it didn't occur to me that none of the official artifacts are non-conditional. Making this conditional fits more with the theme (Archbishops vying for who gets to be the "Pope" and have more power) anyway.

I'll noodle on what that condition could be - what do you think of my initial idea of "If you at least X Worshippers"? So you're forced to choose between spending your Worshippers or saving them to take the Chalice.

Alternatively, another option is the opposite, "if you have at most X worshippers" - making you have to think about getting new ones or spending them quickly.

(and what should X be? this and other cards only give 1 Worshipper at a time, except for Apse Chapel and Graveyard, on gain)

The main reason "no copper in play" was for theme: Archbishop is to Bishop as Grand Market is to Market, so it gets that clause. But it does allow it to cost a little lower( as I think this is overpowered for a regular $6).

It also means you possibly have already trashed a lot of your coppers by the time you get this, which means you'd use your Archbishop gained Worshippers for other cards (or if I do use the condition above, makes it easier to choose to save them).

If that clause weakens the design of the card, I'd consider removing it.

[scolapasta]

Convent seems pretty useless, to be honest. By the time you're greening, you don't really care if your deck has junk in it. The crucial time to trash is in the beginning, way before you're buying Victory cards. The main edge cases would be Mill or if you want to get rid of some Curses.

Thanks for the honest input!

I was unsure of this one for that very reason. But I liked the idea of having a project that was analogous to:
Academy = when you gain an Action card, +1 Villager
Guildhall = when you gain a Treasure card, +1 Coffer

and so Victory cards where the obvious remaining basic card.

I might keep it just for that reason, but who knows? I wonder if there's a way to make it better while still keeping the parallel quality alive.

[scolapasta]

OK, so while I think over all these recent (and excellent!) suggestions, anyone else got any cool ideas for Worshipper cards?

I have one more:

Occult Dealer



Pretty straightforward, now that we have 3 types of spendable tokens, why not a simple card that gives one of each?

Cost wise, I compared to:

• Forager - $3 - which gives +1 Action, +1 Buy, trashes a card and +$X ($1 per differently named treasure).
• Junk Dealer - $5 - +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, trash a card

Since Villagers are usually better than Actions, Worshippers usually better than trash, Coffers usually better than $, and despite the fact that Forager will eventually give more $, it feels stronger than Forager.

At the same time the +1 Card of Junk Dealer is especially valuable, so it feels weaker than Junk Dealer.

Hence, $4. How'd I do?

[scolapasta]

Convent seems pretty useless, to be honest. By the time you're greening, you don't really care if your deck has junk in it. The crucial time to trash is in the beginning, way before you're buying Victory cards. The main edge cases would be Mill or if you want to get rid of some Curses.

Thanks for the honest input!

I was unsure of this one for that very reason. But I liked the idea of having a project that was analogous to:
Academy = when you gain an Action card, +1 Villager
Guildhall = when you gain a Treasure card, +1 Coffer

and so Victory cards where the obvious remaining basic card.

I might keep it just for that reason, but who knows? I wonder if there's a way to make it better while still keeping the parallel quality alive.

So I'll probably make these improvements:
• lower cost
• work when trashing

Convent - Project - $3
When you gain or trash a Victory card, +1 Worshipper

Still may not be worth it, but at least adds more use cases - and if it's the only trashing, you can gain cheap Victory cards, trash them and still have a Worshipper for trashing other cards.

I also considered adding Curse, Ruins, and / or Shelters, but I think that might add too much (it would effectively invalidate cursing attacks, e.g. you'd take the curse with Torturer, then end net +1 Worshipper after your turn)

I've also realized that Road Network could be considered as analogous to Academy and Guildhall, just that it triggers on opponent's gains.

[GendoIkari]

Pretty straightforward, now that we have 3 types of spendable tokens, why not a simple card that gives one of each?

Cost wise, I compared to:

• Forager - $3 - which gives +1 Action, +1 Buy, trashes a card and +$X ($1 per differently named treasure).
• Junk Dealer - $5 - +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, trash a card

Since Villagers are usually better than Actions, Worshippers usually better than trash, Coffers usually better than $, and despite the fact that Forager will eventually give more $, it feels stronger than Forager.

At the same time the +1 Card of Junk Dealer is especially valuable, so it feels weaker than Junk Dealer.

Hence, $4. How'd I do?

Hard to say, but there's a good chance that this is as strong or stronger than Junk Dealer. Junk Dealer is weakened by the fact that the trashing is mandatory. Playing a Junk Dealer isn't really a full cantrip, because it still reduces your hand size after the trashing. So playing an Occult Dealer and playing a Junk Dealer both leave you with 1 card fewer in hand.

[scolapasta]

Pretty straightforward, now that we have 3 types of spendable tokens, why not a simple card that gives one of each?

Cost wise, I compared to:

• Forager - $3 - which gives +1 Action, +1 Buy, trashes a card and +$X ($1 per differently named treasure).
• Junk Dealer - $5 - +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, trash a card

Since Villagers are usually better than Actions, Worshippers usually better than trash, Coffers usually better than $, and despite the fact that Forager will eventually give more $, it feels stronger than Forager.

At the same time the +1 Card of Junk Dealer is especially valuable, so it feels weaker than Junk Dealer.

Hence, $4. How'd I do?

Hard to say, but there's a good chance that this is as strong or stronger than Junk Dealer. Junk Dealer is weakened by the fact that the trashing is mandatory. Playing a Junk Dealer isn't really a full cantrip, because it still reduces your hand size after the trashing. So playing an Occult Dealer and playing a Junk Dealer both leave you with 1 card fewer in hand.

Great point. (and a good way of thinking about the +1 Card of Junk Dealer).

For example, say I have a hand of 1) Junk Dealer and a Copper vs 2) Occult Dealer and a Copper.

Case 1: play Junk Dealer, trash the Copper. I now have 1 Action, 1 (new) card, and $2
Case 2: play Occult Dealer. I now have 1 Villager, 1 Copper, $1 + 1 coffer, and a worshipper.

So if the new card is a copper, then Occult Dealer is stronger, because you can spend the Coffer and use the Worshipper on the copper and are "strictly better" because you have a villager over the action. Additionally you can choose not to spend either the coffer or the worshipper.

Of course, the new card you draw could be better than a copper, so it's not definite that Occult Dealer will always be stronger.

I'll probably try it at 5, then.

[scolapasta]

So, related to my last post, I'd appreciate if people could suggest any other good comparable cards for each of these with which to play test and check cost balance.

So far I've got:

Occult Dealer vs. Junk Dealer
Chapel vs. Apse Chapel (which I've tried before) possibly also vs Cloister (or maybe throw in Monastery here)
Graveyard vs Cemetery.
Archbishop vs Bishop and maybe Grand Market (to see if Archbishop would be worth buying in that case)
Congregation / Blessing vs Remodel

I'm hoping to try some soon and see how it goes.

[Gazbag]

Sorry this post is a bit scatterbrained and not very well structured but I hope you can glean some value from my ramblings.

Congregation is priced at $3 in order to enable double Congregation opens. Is this too strong? Should it be $4 instead?

Some cool stuff coming out of this thread! I wish I had more time on my hands to respond to it all, but for now I'll just comment on the new Congregation/Blessing cards.

I might be mistaken, but I believe a forced cantrip card trashers should be priced around $4.5. "+1 Card, +1 Action, Trash a card from your hand." Given that Congregation does not force you to trash a card, trashes at a time when your trashing window is potentially bigger, and it can set you up for an on-demand remodel, I think you're easily looking at a very good $5 cost. Trying it out at $6 might be a safe place to start, but it then in a way becomes stronger as you could "Bless" your Congregations into Provinces.

All in all I think this is a cool concept and it's a nice, clean remodel variant. The pure Reserve certainly seems to work too and adds a nice interaction with other trashers. Another reason I think this should cost $6 as reaching that price point needs to be carefully considered when trashing down.

Also, Congregation reads "+1 Action, +1 Card, ..." when it should be the other way around!

A lot of excellent points. I really wasn't sure what to price it at, but clearly 3 is too weak.

Looking though some official cards for comparables, I see:

Junk Dealer - $5 - also gives $1
Upgrade - $5 - Cantrip TfB+1
Sauna - $4 - Cantrip - doesn't always trash, but often and can play Avanto for free
Hideout - $4 - gives an extra action, but also a curse if the card you trash is a victory card

I also already have Archbishop at $6*, and was trying to keep most Worshipper-giving cards lower. (though in this case it may still be OK since you're likely getting these for the TfB). And I agree, not sure if I want to enable the TfB to Provinces.

So I may lean towards 5 instead of 6.

Another option is to remove the +1 Card (or the +1 Action).

Is this more interesting as an expensive cantrip or cheaper +1 Action?

I think it's much stronger at $6 than $5, Remodels can be weird like that. I really like this idea now but I think it would be way cooler if Blessing worked on any trash, currently it just seems like it's stopping me from having fun. I think being a cantrip might be a little dangerous for this effect though thinking about it, once you have a Worshipper and a Gold each play basically becomes a Province gain and that's not really much setup for that effect (costing $6 would mean you don't need the Gold hence why I think it'd be stronger). So just being +1 Action might end up working out better, but you need testing for this kind of thing really.

About cards that only work with Worshippers. I think one of the best things about Dominion is that you're free to play the game however you want, whether that's fully randomised or meticulously planned kingdoms or something in between. So to me having cards that you can't play when fully randomising is against the spirit of the game and just a bit lame. But they're your cards so you're free to do things how you want.

I was thinking more on Graveyard and I think perhaps this version isn't the best. It's kind of wonky with openings making a 4/3 much better than a 3/4, which isn't a terrible thing, tons of things do stuff like that but it feels off to me somehow. I had the idea of making it overpay for Worshippers and cost $3, overpay for tokens is something we never got so that'd be cool and it seems fairly balanced to me. Weaker at lower costs but you can build up one big trash and also use it as a simple $3 cost victory late in the game.

I'm still not a fan of Cloister, it doesn't really have a reason to be a Night card anymore. Werewolf does because it's terminal draw and the original Cloister did because it let you play it after a trasher but this new one could just be a "choose one" Action. It also just feels a bit bland to me, it's another card that "just trashes" and I think Apse Chapel does that better.

So, related to my last post, I'd appreciate if people could suggest any other good comparable cards for each of these with which to play test and check cost balance.

So far I've got:

Occult Dealer vs. Junk Dealer
Chapel vs. Apse Chapel (which I've tried before) possibly also vs Cloister (or maybe throw in Monastery here)
Graveyard vs Cemetery.
Archbishop vs Bishop and maybe Grand Market (to see if Archbishop would be worth buying in that case)
Congregation / Blessing vs Remodel

I'm hoping to try some soon and see how it goes.

I wouldn't get too carried away with this kind of comparison, and some of them don't really make sense. Archbishop vs Grand Market for example, sure they have the same cost, but they do completely different things. It'd be like comparing Count to Market or something like that.

[Kudasai]

Okay, I've got time for another quick comment. This time on Archbishop/Chalice:

So I really like the addition of an Artifact, but I think taking it should have some kind of condition you need to meet or cost to it. All of the official Artifacts do. None of them simply give you the Artifact for playing a card. Given the theme of trashing it would be nice to see something along those lines.

Also, I'm curious what the no Copper in play clause is getting at? I get that it makes Archbishop harder to gain, but I'm just curious if there is a specific reason you choose this condition to meet.

Huh, it didn't occur to me that none of the official artifacts are non-conditional. Making this conditional fits more with the theme (Archbishops vying for who gets to be the "Pope" and have more power) anyway.

I'll noodle on what that condition could be - what do you think of my initial idea of "If you at least X Worshippers"? So you're forced to choose between spending your Worshippers or saving them to take the Chalice.

Alternatively, another option is the opposite, "if you have at most X worshippers" - making you have to think about getting new ones or spending them quickly.

(and what should X be? this and other cards only give 1 Worshipper at a time, except for Apse Chapel and Graveyard, on gain)

The main reason "no copper in play" was for theme: Archbishop is to Bishop as Grand Market is to Market, so it gets that clause. But it does allow it to cost a little lower( as I think this is overpowered for a regular $6).

It also means you possibly have already trashed a lot of your coppers by the time you get this, which means you'd use your Archbishop gained Worshippers for other cards (or if I do use the condition above, makes it easier to choose to save them).

If that clause weakens the design of the card, I'd consider removing it.

As a Chalice taking condition I like "if you have at most X worshipers", but if the idea is to make people trash cards, the Worshiper mat needs to be reworded so that if you remove a token you have to trash a card. Otherwise, you can just remove Worshiper tokens to satisfy the Chalice condition without any real consequence. Furthermore, it might be good to also have a minimum token amount needed. So you could have a range of say 2-4 or just make it an exact number like 3. (These are just arbitrary values I choose by the way!)

The Copper gaining clause might be needed, but I get the sense that it isn't. Ignoring the Chalice part, this is a Monument that gives a Worshiper. I think it's fair to price that at about a $5 cost. If the plan is to make Chalice somewhat hard to get I think this is a safe $6 cost without any in-play Copper restrictions. If you really like the Copper thing, maybe you can make it part of the Chalice taking mechanic!

Beyond that I'm likely of no help with what condition to choose and what values it should have. Artifacts are a bit new to me! I'd just be cautious with such a powerful, VP gaining Artifact like this. If one player manages to lock it down for the last 2-3 turns, it's probably game over for the other players.

[scolapasta]

Hi all, I had a very busy week so haven't been able to respond to any of the recent feedback. That said, thank you very much, it continues to be invaluable!

It'll take a while to get to the specific points, so I'll probably write up several small posts (plus at some point, post last week's challenge cards for discussion).

Since I had already made some tweaks of the cards last week, I'm going to first post those (and the reasoning) plus some thoughts I've had since then (related to the feedback):





Occult Dealer and Convent get the changes I had mentioned in previous posts (based on feedback from GendoIkari and Commodore Chuckles, respectively). Occult Dealer gets a price bump to $5, and Convent both gets a discount and now works when trashing Victory cards, in order to help with starting estates. 

For Congregation / Blessing, I had a couple of routes, either make weaker or more expensive (which was tricky, because of the side effect of making it stronger). I decided to try weaker, by removing the +1 Card.

Additionally, I changed Blessing to be a more standard Action - Reserve. The idea behind being a pure Reserve was that it would always be gained to your Tavern mat and returned to its pile. Now that it's an Action - Reserve it can be gained to your hand, which causes you to spend the Action from Congregation to put it on the Tavern mat.

Secondly, now that they are also Actions, I may consider going back to the original idea of trashing them (I had liked the idea of limited Blessings). My concern with them in the trash was for future proofing against something that made you gain from the trash and having you gain a completely useless card.

I was pretty happy with this until I read Gazbag's comment:

... once you have a Worshipper and a Gold each play basically becomes a Province gain and that's not really much setup for that effect ...

Wow! It never even occurred to me that you could use one Worshipper to trash a card (in this case a Gold) and then call multiple Blessings, effectively on the same trashed card. That is clearly quite strong. My original intent was "trash one card, bless one card".

SO I'm trying to decide if's OK to keep like this or try to find a way for it to be the original intent. (I'm toying, for example, with the idea of it costing you an extra worshipper to call the Blessing. But now I risk making this too weak!

More thoughts on Archbishop, Cloister, and Graveyard, and other responses to feedback, coming soon!

[scolapasta]

Sorry this post is a bit scatterbrained and not very well structured but I hope you can glean some value from my ramblings.

I love (and need) any feedback, so no worries. As you saw from my last post, I am definitely gleaning lots of value.

I think it's much stronger at $6 than $5, Remodels can be weird like that. I really like this idea now but I think it would be way cooler if Blessing worked on any trash, currently it just seems like it's stopping me from having fun. I think being a cantrip might be a little dangerous for this effect though thinking about it, once you have a Worshipper and a Gold each play basically becomes a Province gain and that's not really much setup for that effect (costing $6 would mean you don't need the Gold hence why I think it'd be stronger). So just being +1 Action might end up working out better, but you need testing for this kind of thing really.

Feel free to let me know what you think of the latest. I feel like I'm struggling with the right balance on this one.

It's either too strong as it is currently (at least it feels too strong with the fact that you can just stockpile blessings and then trash just one Gold).

Or my ideas to weaken it go too far. For example, my idea if having it cost you an extra worshipper to call the Blessing, means that you'd have to play Congregation three times in order to remodel once. (I guess I could remove the one shot aspect). Any thoughts are welcome.

FYI, the possible wording I'm considering if I do have it cost another Worshipper is:
"When you trash a card not from the Supply, you may call this to remove a Worshipper token from its mat. If you do, gain a card costing $2 more than the trashed card and trash this."

So in this case, it can be called after any trashing, which does help some. (note that similar to above thoughts, without requiring the use of the extra Worshipper, my concern was allowing, for example, remodel of a Gold for a province, then call Blessings for more provinces)

I'm still not a fan of Cloister, it doesn't really have a reason to be a Night card anymore. Werewolf does because it's terminal draw and the original Cloister did because it let you play it after a trasher but this new one could just be a "choose one" Action. It also just feels a bit bland to me, it's another card that "just trashes" and I think Apse Chapel does that better.

The reason I have it as Night is so that it can't be drawn dead. (otherwise, like you said it is just a choice)

When you mention Werewolf's reason to be Action-Night is so it doesn't draw *itself* dead? Should it matter much (as far as reasoning goes) if the card itself does the drawing or something else does?

The point about just another card that just trashes is valid. It's true, but I do think the choice makes it more interesting. But it probably does need something else.

I have come up with another idea for Worshippers. I'm debating whether it's for a new card or maybe for Cloister.

[scolapasta]

I was thinking more on Graveyard and I think perhaps this version isn't the best. It's kind of wonky with openings making a 4/3 much better than a 3/4, which isn't a terrible thing, tons of things do stuff like that but it feels off to me somehow. I had the idea of making it overpay for Worshippers and cost $3, overpay for tokens is something we never got so that'd be cool and it seems fairly balanced to me. Weaker at lower costs but you can build up one big trash and also use it as a simple $3 cost victory late in the game.

Overpay for tokens is definitely interesting and different, if I can figure it out.

Can you help me understand why 4/3 would be so much better than 3/4? Is it that after two turns you'd trash 2 estates, while 3/4 would only trash the 1? I'm trying to make sure overpay wouldn't create the same issues, so I think maybe it wouldn't give any worshippers at cost:

Graveyard - Victory - $3
2 VP
-
You may overpay for this. For each $1 you overpaid, +1 Worshipper.

Alternatively, I'm considering in making it a Victory - Night, as that feels thematic for Graveyard. Maybe take the Night clause from Cloister, if I change that one more dramatically:

Graveyard - Victory - Night - $3
+1 Worshipper
-
2 VP

I think I like overpay better. Now I want to make some overpay cards for Villagers and Coffers.

[scolapasta]

OK, I mocked up the overpay Graveyard and at the same time came up with an overpay for Villagers and one for Coffers.

My guiding principle was to continue the synergies between: Victory cards - Worshippers, Action cards - Villagers, Treasure card - Coffers.

Here are the initial drafts:

Graveyard, overpay for Worshippers
Developing Village, overpay for Developing Village
Endowment, overpay for Coffers




Comments / Questions:

To be honest, I'm not yet sure what I think of these. Do they have any potential?

Outside of Graveyard, which is just a flat 2VP, I tried to be at least little creative.

The main thing (as always) I'm unsure of are the specific numbers: their costs and in this case, the fact that they are all +$1 per token on the overpay. (at different times, I tried different numbers)

So general possible tweak:
• change the number of tokens gained per overpay (and consequently, its cost)

In the case of Graveyard, I keep comparing to Cemetery. While 1 Worshipper is significantly less than 4 cards, part of the challenge with cemetery is even having 4 cards in your hand when you buy it (though it does combo with gainers). The Worshipper will always be useful, and you can get more with higher overpaying.

Possible tweaks:
• always give 1 Worshipper on gain
• change from plain 2VP to something more creative (could be similar to Endowment, that you have to have at least one Worshipper; but I'd prefer it to be different, or to change Endowment then)

Developing Village, as the name states, has some DNA from both Develop and Village. By overpaying it can be a village for at least some turns. And it will get you the equivalent +1 card; usually, you can just gain the same card if it's what you want, or you can "trade" for something that would be more useful. But you don't have to trash, e.g. in case you reveal a valuable Prize, or it's a Province and you don't want to decrease the Province pile by one.

Possible tweaks:
• changing the gained card to "up to the same cost", or "up to $1 more than the the cost"
• add either : "If you do, +1 Action" or  "if you don't, +1 Card." or both. With probable cost increase.
• alternatively, allow you to discard the card (in the examples above, you'd likely keep the prize on top, but discard the province). Either this or the previous option would allow you to string together several of these.

Endowment basically says, as long as you keep some Coffers around, it's a cheap silver. I think it could be an interesting decision if you have 6 whether you buy a gold that is always $3 or buy this and get 4 (1 of which you may never ant spend) coffers. But I am worried that may be too strong.

Possible tweaks:
• only require one Coffers total rather than per Endowment in play
• remove this requirement altogether

[Gazbag]

Sorry this post is a bit scatterbrained and not very well structured but I hope you can glean some value from my ramblings.

I love (and need) any feedback, so no worries. As you saw from my last post, I am definitely gleaning lots of value.

I think it's much stronger at $6 than $5, Remodels can be weird like that. I really like this idea now but I think it would be way cooler if Blessing worked on any trash, currently it just seems like it's stopping me from having fun. I think being a cantrip might be a little dangerous for this effect though thinking about it, once you have a Worshipper and a Gold each play basically becomes a Province gain and that's not really much setup for that effect (costing $6 would mean you don't need the Gold hence why I think it'd be stronger). So just being +1 Action might end up working out better, but you need testing for this kind of thing really.

Feel free to let me know what you think of the latest. I feel like I'm struggling with the right balance on this one.

It's either too strong as it is currently (at least it feels too strong with the fact that you can just stockpile blessings and then trash just one Gold).

Or my ideas to weaken it go too far. For example, my idea if having it cost you an extra worshipper to call the Blessing, means that you'd have to play Congregation three times in order to remodel once. (I guess I could remove the one shot aspect). Any thoughts are welcome.

FYI, the possible wording I'm considering if I do have it cost another Worshipper is:
"When you trash a card not from the Supply, you may call this to remove a Worshipper token from its mat. If you do, gain a card costing $2 more than the trashed card and trash this."

So in this case, it can be called after any trashing, which does help some. (note that similar to above thoughts, without requiring the use of the extra Worshipper, my concern was allowing, for example, remodel of a Gold for a province, then call Blessings for more provinces)

I'm still not a fan of Cloister, it doesn't really have a reason to be a Night card anymore. Werewolf does because it's terminal draw and the original Cloister did because it let you play it after a trasher but this new one could just be a "choose one" Action. It also just feels a bit bland to me, it's another card that "just trashes" and I think Apse Chapel does that better.

The reason I have it as Night is so that it can't be drawn dead. (otherwise, like you said it is just a choice)

When you mention Werewolf's reason to be Action-Night is so it doesn't draw *itself* dead? Should it matter much (as far as reasoning goes) if the card itself does the drawing or something else does?

The point about just another card that just trashes is valid. It's true, but I do think the choice makes it more interesting. But it probably does need something else.

I have come up with another idea for Worshippers. I'm debating whether it's for a new card or maybe for Cloister.

If Blessings with $6-costs does prove to be too much a possible solution would be to reduce Blessing to gain something costing $1 more. Although I imagine making the Blessings terminal has weakened them quite a lot already.

Werewolf being Night affects how it interacts with other copies of itself, with Cloister it affects how it interacts with other cards. Personally I think that making a card as simple as it can be should take priority over how it interacts with other cards in one specific situation.

Can you help me understand why 4/3 would be so much better than 3/4? Is it that after two turns you'd trash 2 estates, while 3/4 would only trash the 1? I'm trying to make sure overpay wouldn't create the same issues, so I think maybe it wouldn't give any worshippers at cost:

Yeah that's right, on 3/4 you only trash 1 Estate and add the Graveyard to your deck so you're not net-trashing any victories from your deck before you shuffle. 

I believe overpay for Coffers was testing for Guilds and was deemed crazy, so I doubt that's going to work. I think Villagers should work though, although I don't think the top half of Developing Village is a viable card. Having a $2 cantrip that gains a card every time you play it is just going to burn through piles really fast. I think following Lackey's and Silk Merchant's lead and making the card terminal might be a good idea, perhaps a non-drawing terminal to differentiate it from those a bit? I like the idea of attaching it to a crappy terminal that you might not want to waste a Villager playing, even just a terminal Silver for $2 sounds alright to me.

[scolapasta]

If Blessings with $6-costs does prove to be too much a possible solution would be to reduce Blessing to gain something costing $1 more. Although I imagine making the Blessings terminal has weakened them quite a lot already.

Sure, I'll should probably just playtest as is, before I change it any more. Need to gather the troops.

How do others playtest? Solo or with friends? (I have several friends who enjoy Dominion, but don't play that frequently; not sure if I should subject them to my custom cards!)

Werewolf being Night affects how it interacts with other copies of itself, with Cloister it affects how it interacts with other cards. Personally I think that making a card as simple as it can be should take priority over how it interacts with other cards in one specific situation.

I agree with erring on the simple vs overcomplicating for specific situations. That said, I don't think of "not drawing dead" as too specific a situation, nor making the choice be Action vs Night vs Action vs Action as overcomplicated.

Yeah that's right, on 3/4 you only trash 1 Estate and add the Graveyard to your deck so you're not net-trashing any victories from your deck before you shuffle. 

I believe overpay for Coffers was testing for Guilds and was deemed crazy, so I doubt that's going to work. I think Villagers should work though, although I don't think the top half of Developing Village is a viable card. Having a $2 cantrip that gains a card every time you play it is just going to burn through piles really fast. I think following Lackey's and Silk Merchant's lead and making the card terminal might be a good idea, perhaps a non-drawing terminal to differentiate it from those a bit? I like the idea of attaching it to a crappy terminal that you might not want to waste a Villager playing, even just a terminal Silver for $2 sounds alright to me.

Do you know any more about what was so crazy about overpay for Coffers in their testing? The biggest issue I see is that you could get a huge hand of 20 coins and only 1 buy, and so buy this so it doesn't go to waste. But I'm sure I can think of a clever way to make this work!

You may be right that Developing Village is not the right card for overpay for actions (though I'm not completely sure). I do think the card otherwise has potential. It will burn through piles fast - I just think that would make games with it a different beast and you'd have to alter your strategy to account for it. Similar to when someone goes Workshop / Gardens.

I actually am trying to avoid being too similar to Lackeys, Silk Merchant, and Spices, as I just see those as forced overpay:

• Spices is just a silver with a forced overpay of 2 for 2 tokens.
• Lackeys is a $0 Action with a forced overpay of 2 for 2 tokens.
• Silk Merchant is $2 Action with a forced overpay of 2 for 2 tokens (and on trash benefit).

[scolapasta]

I think Villagers should work though, although I don't think the top half of Developing Village is a viable card. Having a $2 cantrip that gains a card every time you play it is just going to burn through piles really fast.

You may be right that Developing Village is not the right card for overpay for actions (though I'm not completely sure). I do think the card otherwise has potential. It will burn through piles fast - I just think that would make games with it a different beast and you'd have to alter your strategy to account for it. Similar to when someone goes Workshop / Gardens.

Actually, how about these tweaks to Developing Village:



I added the " If you do, +1 Action; if you don't, +1 Card." tweaks. But more importantly, two simple words: differently named, so you can't trash for the same card.

So it's a cantrip that can become a village if:
• you do trade for a different card
• overpay to get villagers

Or you could still save those villagers for something else.

[scolapasta]

A couple of minor tweaks while I continue to figure out Archbishop / Chalice, Blessing, and Cloister. (I've made some changes that I'm letting simmer, while also pondering a much more radical change).

Worshippers mat: wording changed to a) be more like the other mats and also now requires you to trash if you "spend" the Worshipper. Will only matter if I add a negative aspect to Worshippers, like "at most X Worshippers" for Archbishop, but I like it better anyway.

Convent: dropped cost even more to $2. Still may not be very useful, until I get rid of it completely might as well price it at a cost that makes it more attractive.

[mail-mi]

I wonder if Convent would be a lot better if it gave a worshipper on buy. As it is now, if there is no other trashing, I have to buy an Estate or something to start trashing my estates.

[scolapasta]

Hi all,

I recently noticed that I was approaching 100 posts, so decided I'd save it for a quick thank you to everyone on this forum.

It's been fun being more active and trying to come up with good custom cards. I've even branched out recently and starting opining on other cards! (which feels intimidating, because I'm not nearly as experienced a player as most of you, and often don't see the connections you guys immediately do).

All the feedback has been great, and I think my cards are all in definitely better states than their 0.1 version. (interestingly enough, my one card that did best and finished runner up one week is still at its 0.1 version!)

Anyway, I do plan on adding a new update for some of the Worshipper cards, plus revisiting the recent Challenge cards, as I'd like to finalize* Cabal and Coven, soon, plus I have some new ideas for my first custom card, Student.

So stay tuned!

* will any of these cards ever actually be final?

Bonus: a picture of some of my sleeved custom cards and the Worshipper mats, ready for playtesting:

[scolapasta]

OK, it's been too long since I've posted anything on this thread (outside of my 100th post), so here is the latest update on Worshippers. It's simple, for now, but I'll at least mention some of the other ideas I've had.


The latest Archbishop and Chalice:



I went back and forth for a while trying to determine what the condition for taking the Chalice should be. In the end, I decided to go with this thematic way: the more Worshippers you have, the more powerful your Archbishops are. And hopefully this is countered by the fact that other players get more Worshippers and that chalice is now only once per turn, so while a nice benefit, you can't pull off a massive turn of trashing many cards for many VPs.

(I also went ahead and removed the no Coppers clause)


Convent:

I wonder if Convent would be a lot better if it gave a worshipper on buy. As it is now, if there is no other trashing, I have to buy an Estate or something to start trashing my estates.

Good suggestion to make it stronger. However, I think I like the idea that sometimes (boards without trashing) you'll have to first gain an Victory to start the trashing.

At least I want to play test it some like that and see if it's at all useful.


I think I'm finally convinced there's no need for the Action - Night card, at least as currently written. What that would do is free up the name "Cloister". And since I never really loved "Apse Chapel" as a name, I will probably change the original Worshippers card to be called Cloister.

(I have another effect that I was trying on Cloister but I think it will fit better on a differently named card)

[scolapasta]

So, one thing I'd like to do on this thread is repost older challenge cards in case anyone wants to help improve them.
My idea is to do it once a month so as to post multiple (4) cards at once, while also updating the first two posts of this thread (post 1: listing of all the cards; post 2: Secret History of all the cards).

I've gotten a little delayed, so let me post the 4 most recent ones now and I'll probably do the next post in a couple of weeks, so I can get on that schedule.

Anyway, here they are (followed by some comments):





Collector:

Collector is similar to Improve. The main differences are:
• it allows you to "improve" any played card (so can be used to trash coppers)
• you have to decide as you play the cards, by setting possibly candidates aside
• setting aside can make you skip a shuffle which could be either bad or good (this was a last change in order to have the setting aside mean something; besides just helping Magic Lamp)

The main issue with Collector, as pointed out by faust, is that it would be possible to have a board (with no draw) and it being impossible to activate Magic Lamp. (Secret Cave is a cantrip, so even without draw, you could play, Secret Cave, Action #2, Copper, Silver, Gold, Magic Lamp, and activate).

So while Collector does help with the setting aside, it's not enough and, in its current state, is a bad design. Hopefully it'll be as easy as just making it a cantrip. See v0.4 below.

My biggest question is: is it worth keeping this card or keep trying to improve it? Or is having it exist with setting aside mostly just for Magic Lamp not interesting enough and I should drop efforts on it?


Stockpile:

This one was a misunderstanding on my part of the challenge, but still got a decent review. I think play testing will help determine if 2 uses each time is enough or if it needs to be a little stronger. Overall, I think the concept of a "reloadable" Gold has merit.

Cabal:

Some people thought this card was not very valuable, because you might have a board with no or only one other Night cards, but I think that a) even in the presence of one other Night card it does have value, and b) even without any other, it still could be worth buying since it can't be drawn dead.

It was compared to Royal Carriage and not as useful as it and I do understand that. I think my main objection is that most boards won't have Royal Carriage. And if the argument is well, the board might have RC, I think the counterargument is, the board might have Night cards (which are more likely).

Coven:

The main concern for this one is how it would compare to other cursers. It was suggested to make it stronger or cheaper. I'm opting for cheaper and see how that looks. (I did also remove the non Attack clause, so now you can, for example, supercharge your Witches to gives 2 Curses - once per turn, of course)


So here are the updated versions for Collector and Coven:






I'm hopeful that by posting 4 at once, there'll be some more feedback for some of these cards. And honestly, even if the feedback is: "this design is just not worth iterating on" that would be helpful.

[Gazbag]

Not sure if someone mentioned this before but Collector lets you keep one shot cards due to lose track rule, it fortunately doesn't work with Magic Lamp but still something to think about. Playing multiple Collectors is also a bit weird. I don't think the effect is distinct enough from Improve to be worth all the weirdness to be honest.

[scolapasta]

Not sure if someone mentioned this before but Collector lets you keep one shot cards due to lose track rule, it fortunately doesn't work with Magic Lamp but still something to think about. Playing multiple Collectors is also a bit weird. I don't think the effect is distinct enough from Improve to be worth all the weirdness to be honest.

No one else had mentioned it, but I had seen that. I could probably change the setting aside to "directly after playing a card".

I do see what you mean about multiple Collectors since I guess you could choose to trash a card you had set aside that you had trashed with an earlier Collector. Why would you do? I don't know, but you could with current wording.

I think you're right about probably not worth it - I think maybe I just had a dud for this challenge. I may still try to play with the idea of setting aside cards to help activate for Magic Lamp, but differently than Improve. Or reuse the idea of "Collector" but in a vastly different way.

[Kudasai]

OK, it's been too long since I've posted anything on this thread (outside of my 100th post), so here is the latest update on Worshippers. It's simple, for now, but I'll at least mention some of the other ideas I've had.


The latest Archbishop and Chalice:



I went back and forth for a while trying to determine what the condition for taking the Chalice should be. In the end, I decided to go with this thematic way: the more Worshippers you have, the more powerful your Archbishops are. And hopefully this is countered by the fact that other players get more Worshippers and that chalice is now only once per turn, so while a nice benefit, you can't pull off a massive turn of trashing many cards for many VPs.

(I also went ahead and removed the no Coppers clause)

At first glance it seems like there is a nice separation of how a player should go about trashing with Arch Bishop. Use the Worshippers for early trashing and deck acceleration or pile them up for late game, trashing with VP gaining. On the surface I really like this!

Cabal - A Throne Room that cannot dud is always nice. I wonder if the top decking during your Night phase is good enough to validate the $5 cost. I only mention this because the instances where you'd be able to play another Night card twice are few and far between. If it's rarely used it may just be taking up room. It may also help players track what's going on if the Action text is on top and the Night stuff on bottom.

Cool cards though! Have you played any games yet with any of your cards? If so, how'd they go?

[scolapasta]

At first glance it seems like there is a nice separation of how a player should go about trashing with Arch Bishop. Use the Worshippers for early trashing and deck acceleration or pile them up for late game, trashing with VP gaining. On the surface I really like this!

I still may need to tweak the condition, but it definitely makes it significantly more interesting than the original. So thanks for suggesting that!

Cabal - A Throne Room that cannot dud is always nice. I wonder if the top decking during your Night phase is good enough to validate the $5 cost. I only mention this because the instances where you'd be able to play another Night card twice are few and far between. If it's rarely used it may just be taking up room. It may also help players track what's going on if the Action text is on top and the Night stuff on bottom.

I tried to follow the precedent that Werewolf set up. I guess it could say "If it's not your Night phase", but that seems a little strange. (I don't think we want "If it's your Action phase" here because then it wouldn't work with cards like Scepter or Innovation. (and as I mentioned in another thread, I'm not sure if "at the start of your turn" is actually your Action phase, for cards like Ghost or Piazza)

So I'm not sure if there's really a good way to switch that around.

I have considered adding a below the line "Setup: Add an extra Night Kingdom cards pile to the Supply." (I have another card that cares about Attack cards, and has am considering a similar "Add 2 Attack cards" setup)

OR I could make it a Duration too, and have the Night be something like "At the start of your next turn, put this in your hand." That way, it doesn't it doesn't take the place of one of the other 5 cards...

Cool cards though! Have you played any games yet with any of your cards? If so, how'd they go?

Not yet. Summer time has been hard to rally the troops!

[scolapasta]

So here's my entry from the recently ended challenge (#47):



And the feedback from the judge (Aquila):

Infusion/Cauldron (scolapasta)
Event, P +1 Buy, trash a card you have in play for + $1 per $2 it costs, if it costs $4 or more take Cauldron, then play any number of Treasures from your hand.
Artifact, Potions have "Choose one: +P; or + $3".
The Potion cost of the Event is a great idea in this contest, you play the Potion repeatedly to compete for the Artifact. But how many Potions does one get so that they should turn into Gold for deck payload? And seeing that this won't be a permanent feature, why not just get Golds? The half-Salvager bit would work for removing the Potion you used to pay for this, if the Cauldron didn't imply you should try to keep it; otherwise it has a few niche uses.
Overall: I feel Cauldron should do something else, but Infusion is good.

It's interesting, because I actually came up with Cauldron first, and Infusion was an attempt to find its companion Event.

• "how many Potions does one get so that they should turn into Gold for deck payload?"

Some of my thinking here was that you would keep getting potions in order to feed this engine payload. If you had 3 potions you could buy a Province (whether you had the Cauldron or not, though if you didn't you may have to trash one of the Potions to get it and find some space to replace it - though instead of the Province you could buy two Potions)

• "And seeing that this won't be a permanent feature..."
The purpose of the "Play any number of Treasures from your hand phrase" was so you could always get the benefit if the Cauldron at least on the turn you took it.

• "...why not just get Golds?"
Well, $4 Potion / Golds are cheaper than $6 Golds

• "...removing the Potion you used to pay for this, if the Cauldron didn't imply you should try to keep it" - I saw this as part of the challenge, that you have to keep burning through a Potions to overload your Potions, so you'd have to make decide whether you trash that Potion or some other $4 card.

So, what do others think?

A couple of ideas I had to change to try and make this better, would be to change the requirement to take the Cauldron from "If it costs $4" to something else. How about "If it's a Treasure"? then you could trash coppers early to get the cauldron, but later you'd have to sacrifice one of your Potions...

Another change could be to make the Potions better than Gold, i.e. +$4.

Lastly, here is the other alternative (rather than the 1/2 Salvager) I had earlier considered and already mentioned:



i.e the Villa variant

This might also need the change to the "if it costs $4" change. And even if it doesn't work here, I'll probably work with it as a different event for some future challenge.


Note: In order to post a little more here, I think my new idea is to try to post each challenges' cards)) each week after they're judged. Eventually I'll go back and include past challenges. But I like the idea of getting them out here while they're still fresh and often while we're still waiting for the next challenge.

[scolapasta]

That feeling when two of your better (imho) custom cards get their names usurped by official cards...