Print

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

[spineflu]

So i've been working on designing cards and then i accidentally a full expansion of cards, and then i accidentally a full five expansions of cards, and then i browsed the variants/fan cards formula and realized a whole bunch wouldn't work / would be bad / would not be "fun" and trimmed it down to three-ish and then realized a couple people had better ideas for cards than me or cards that fit with the whole set scheme (cited/credited as I get to them) and swapped them in.

Slowly working on making paper copies of all these.


backcountrywhy even have the marquee text option if you don't use it, right?

Backcountry is my sort-of sequel to Adventures. Its main mechanical themes are:

• cost adjustment
• states
• cares about what else is on the tavern mat

Its mechanical subthemes are

• co-op random "events" (Causes, so called because "event" was already taken)
• Tavern Mats (sort of by default)
• Mixed piles
• Trashing from the supply

Its flavor themes are pastoral cattle farming, being in a literal tavern, a sort of barney fife-esque small town law and order, and just a hint of The Wicker Man.

New mechanics for Backcountry:
Causes are card-like things that are shuffled, then one is shuffled into each of the Kingdom piles prior to the start of the game (in the event of split piles (introduced in Dominion: Empires), you may either randomly slot in the cause or just not include a Cause in that pile; it's your game and you should play it the way you like.) Causes affect all players. When a cause is revealed on a Kingdom pile, it is set aside; at the end of the turn the Cause was revealed, it is resolved - do what the card says on it. After resolving the Cause, it is placed back in the game box, removing it from the game.
When building the Causes deck (prior to shuffling/adding one to each supply pile), you may include a number of blank white cards if you'd like each pile to potentially not have a cause in it - when the blank card is revealed, simply return it to the box.

Mixed Piles are like split piles but their order doesn't matter. You can only buy or gain the top card of the pile. Mixed piles with two different cards have five each; mixed piles with three different cards have four each. While this goes against the conventional ten card pile, it does go with the original design choice of twelve cards per kingdom pile.

Here's some of the cards + cardlike things (i'll post more slowly over time)
Events

Just because something is illegal doesn't mean you can't do it.


An attack-like event specifically for later-game.


An attackesque event that allows you to accidentally swamp hag yourself.


Use your tavern mat as an island



States

a state that marks piles and gives players prohibition counters (really an excuse to re-use embargo counters). The prohibition counters, in turn, interact with some Causes.


a state that makes money cheaper and doing things hard.

Supply cards

A lynchpin card used by other Cattle cards.

some other cattle cards:






^ mixed pile with v


Causes

For use with the Prohibition event, but works without it


For use with the Prohibition event, doesn't work without it.


More of a generic Cause


More to come in this set!

[Aquila]

Here's a brief Backcountry overview:

Main themes: States are a wide open design space with lots of potential, look forward to seeing what else you've done. With using the tavern mat just mind interactions with the Reserve cards and Miser. With cost adjustment, go overboard and it'll be really hard for players to keep track of the changes all the time; with the other Supply alterations in this set there's a huge amount going on.

Subthemes: Mixed piles add randomness, suggesting that you want Backcountry to be a relaxed, low-skill set less about strategy and more about player interaction. Supply trashing understandably goes with this, but too much and the game can be over on 3 piles before players get satisfying decks together.
Causes I first thought would be further randomness with shuffling them in (with split piles you could always say put them in the middle), but then I remembered players can look through the piles at any time to see where they are. So it's public knowledge when they come up and what will happen - that can make for some neat strategizing! You could certainly do interesting things with Causes!

Prohibited: this looks like it wants to be another unique mechanic like the Causes and mixed piles. I don't really get the $4 cost Event; what are you buying? The rules could be kept in the 'rulebook' and the tokens in the box. To introduce the Prohibited State into a game you could use a unique type on the things that need the tokens, like Looter to Ruins. So one random pile each game powers these up - the replayability it adds is nice, the competition to win the split of the pile another thing if it's worth it.

Out of time to look at the specific cards and the cow mechanic, but the combination of Causes and Prohibited could make for a neat set. Mixed piles...I don't think will really work. That kind of randomness doesn't really suit Dominion.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Prohibited should not be a State. It's more similar to the Bane card.

Giving Stampede the "Attack" type does nothing as everything that reacts to Attack cards says "when another player plays an Attack card" and Stampede cannot be played. Note that Raid is not an Attack.

[spineflu]

Here's a brief Backcountry overview:

Main themes: States are a wide open design space with lots of potential, look forward to seeing what else you've done. With using the tavern mat just mind interactions with the Reserve cards and Miser. With cost adjustment, go overboard and it'll be really hard for players to keep track of the changes all the time; with the other Supply alterations in this set there's a huge amount going on.

Subthemes: Mixed piles add randomness, suggesting that you want Backcountry to be a relaxed, low-skill set less about strategy and more about player interaction. Supply trashing understandably goes with this, but too much and the game can be over on 3 piles before players get satisfying decks together.
Causes I first thought would be further randomness with shuffling them in (with split piles you could always say put them in the middle), but then I remembered players can look through the piles at any time to see where they are. So it's public knowledge when they come up and what will happen - that can make for some neat strategizing! You could certainly do interesting things with Causes!

Prohibited: this looks like it wants to be another unique mechanic like the Causes and mixed piles. I don't really get the $4 cost Event; what are you buying? The rules could be kept in the 'rulebook' and the tokens in the box. To introduce the Prohibited State into a game you could use a unique type on the things that need the tokens, like Looter to Ruins. So one random pile each game powers these up - the replayability it adds is nice, the competition to win the split of the pile another thing if it's worth it.

Out of time to look at the specific cards and the cow mechanic, but the combination of Causes and Prohibited could make for a neat set. Mixed piles...I don't think will really work. That kind of randomness doesn't really suit Dominion.

player interaction (especially non-attack player interaction) is definitely a highlight goal for me with these (esp. in the third set, "Syndicates", but that's future knowledge). The supply pile trashing is a minor theme, nothing overboard.

re: what you're buying with Prohibition, you're adding a token delivery mechanic to a pile (similar to a conceptual Adventure token for +1 Coffers) but it affects all players (a la Embargo). What the prohibition tokens do is resolve when the Vice Raid and Valuable Contraband Causes come up, as well as provide a future design space thematically based around bootlegging/smuggling.

The mixed piles will be expanded upon in my second set, "Heresy"; for now they're largely cards that are variations on a theme, synergize in a way that doesn't necessitate one happening first a la split piles, and/or a collection of lower cost cards that would maybe be boring to have all three as separate kingdom cards but put them all together in one pile and you get interesting interactions. Having a nonconsistent supply pile can create interesting randomness in the (un)availability of the card you want.

Prohibited should not be a State. It's more similar to the Bane card.

Giving Stampede the "Attack" type does nothing as everything that reacts to Attack cards says "when another player plays an Attack card" and Stampede cannot be played. Note that Raid is not an Attack.

Prohibited is actually closer to an Adventures-style token, i just didnt want to have the rules for it buried in the rulebook, nor have it be player-specific. While there havent been non-player-anchored states, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel here - let states be attached to whatever and provide additional rules for what they're attached to.

Good catch on Stampede tho. I'll change that tomorrow when i'm back at my work pc.

[spineflu]

A general disclaimanifesto: a pervasive subtheme in many of my designs (both in dominion and in other/original board game designs) is hubris cards/abilities - higher risk cards or strategies that generally don't pay off. While this is boring to a competitive scene (there's usually a more optimal/dependable path), it enables the "big fish" stories that more casual game scenes thrive off of. This is the same design space that MtG's "Un-" sets live in; it sees cards like Coppersmith, Tribute, or snagging three coppers per turn for a Thief-Garden combo as worthwhile paths to examine, not missteps. I'd encourage looking at your own designs from this perspective. Ask whether a thing is fun when it pays off rarely - is the payoff story worth the times it doesnt work? Is the randomness fun for a new player? Since most gamers play a game only a handful of times, I'd say light constant randomness (shuffling) and heavy intermittent randomness (rare payoff strategies) are both crucial to a design to encourge a positive memory of a game, despite ths latter discouraging data-driven replayability.

[Aquila]

...

player interaction (especially non-attack player interaction) is definitely a highlight goal for me with these (esp. in the third set, "Syndicates", but that's future knowledge). The supply pile trashing is a minor theme, nothing overboard.

A general disclaimanifesto: a pervasive subtheme in many of my designs (both in dominion and in other/original board game designs) is hubris cards/abilities - higher risk cards or strategies that generally don't pay off. While this is boring to a competitive scene (there's usually a more optimal/dependable path), it enables the "big fish" stories that more casual game scenes thrive off of. This is the same design space that MtG's "Un-" sets live in; it sees cards like Coppersmith, Tribute, or snagging three coppers per turn for a Thief-Garden combo as worthwhile paths to examine, not missteps. I'd encourage looking at your own designs from this perspective. Ask whether a thing is fun when it pays off rarely - is the payoff story worth the times it doesnt work? Is the randomness fun for a new player? Since most gamers play a game only a handful of times, I'd say light constant randomness (shuffling) and heavy intermittent randomness (rare payoff strategies) are both crucial to a design to encourge a positive memory of a game, despite ths latter discouraging data-driven replayability.

Yes, this is a fine way to expand the game. Those who like a more strategic Dominion can always stick to Donald's cards, can't they?

re: what you're buying with Prohibition, you're adding a token delivery mechanic to a pile (similar to a conceptual Adventure token for +1 Coffers) but it affects all players (a la Embargo). What the prohibition tokens do is resolve when the Vice Raid and Valuable Contraband Causes come up, as well as provide a future design space thematically based around bootlegging/smuggling.

So 5 x players tokens go on the event, ready for taking. Are there going to be other ways to get them besides the Prohibited State? If there aren't then the number of tokens won't match up to the number of cards in the Prohibited pile in 3+ player games.
And what I meant with buying was, you pay $4 to use the Event, what happens?

The mixed piles will be expanded upon in my second set, "Heresy"; for now they're largely cards that are variations on a theme, synergize in a way that doesn't necessitate one happening first a la split piles, and/or a collection of lower cost cards that would maybe be boring to have all three as separate kingdom cards but put them all together in one pile and you get interesting interactions. Having a nonconsistent supply pile can create interesting randomness in the (un)availability of the card you want.

This could well work, and with your intent on the player interaction side it looks like a good mechanic to explore. It might just be Slaughterhouse/Cattleman I don't really like - terminal Actions are the ones players want to get right in their decks, and these two behave quite differently. So, I could see a mixed pile of very similar and/or non-terminal cards working better.

At least, this is from a strategy player's point of view. I'll try to be fair looking at the individual cards:

Stampede - I can't help but point out that Donald found a top-of-deck trash Attack did not work, and he really tried to make it happen! The exeunt of Saboteur from 2E Intrigue tells the whole story. Someone has to trash a Province, another a Copper or something not serious. By pure chance the player with the Province is losing. There's also the potential to reduce players' decks to nothing and render them helpless. I guess this really establishes the audience you're after, some people will like the 'gotcha' moments but strategy gamers will be frustrated at this.

Witchhunt - the buyer hopes to get a Silver on the deck, at a risk that's more favourable the more players there are. I doubt this costs $5, maybe $4 or even $3. Besides this it captures the casual spirit of Stampede in a less volatile way, so it's good.

Abbey - a purely strategic one. I first wonder if someone would want to pay $4 for this, but Island-ing a Province is valuable. And too cheap might speed Miser up too much or make readying Reserves too easy.

Fallow - trashing a Treasure is optional as you can always just play all your Treasures down before buying this, but Copper trashing will often be what this is used for. So effectively it costs $4 to trash one Copper, so much weaker than Bonfire. The kingdom pile trash is situational; aside from cards that gain things from the trash and split/mixed piles, will someone have a spare $3 to go towards slowly emptying piles? So overall, this could be a touch cheaper at maybe $2?

Cow - how many of these are there? The premise looks good, storing these up to spike certain effects.
Rustle/Wanted - Wanted shouldn't be too hard to remember as you take it yourself. It can add reason to why you get Rustle, pointing towards either a big money strategy or a trash-Actions-for-benefit one. Rustle itself can essentially be a Silver in Action form - you get 2 Cows to hand and reserve them, never calling them into deck again. This suggests a higher price of $3 or $4. Of course it depends on how many Cows there are, once they empty out you're taking them from others and it becomes a Copper.
If other Cattle cards are in the game this becomes a bit more potent and more fun, but usable without if an all random draft makes such happen.
Milkmaid - compared to Miser: in exchange for having the desired Treasure from the start and thinning the deck, reserving them is non-terminal and you get a buy. Difficult to tell without playtesting, but the buildup speed feels about the same. You can change the number of cows that come with it if needs be.
Slaughterhouse/Cattleman - to elaborate on what I said earlier, Slaughterhouse trashes the cows, whereas Cattleman can reuse them later. It seems a lot more worthwhile to make a Cattleman deck, one that can handle the cows coming and going; you need only draw a Copper's worth each time to achieve the same amount of payload as Slaughterhouse, albeit without the pseudo buy. It's more flexible too, Slaughterhouse emphasises 'store 4 cows for a Province' quite strongly but Cattleman could say cycle 2 cows each turn. So, the chance element of the pile feels a bit too harsh here to be liked.

Causes
Valuable Contraband - players want to either time when they can best get a Gold and Duchy, or compete for prohibition tokens first. It feels a fair bit more fun and meaningful with a Prohibited pile, although if this ended up just one card down the Prohibited pile itself...whoever gets to gain that top card first takes a nice prize, yet it's a balanced one not overly dominating early. It should work.

Vice Raid - the Prohibited pile is discouraged...or not, depending on where this ends up. It can be nice to analyse, and I guess the flavour of going innocent or criminal is a nice touch.

A Time to Sow - a simple Cause that quietens the noise of the others, which is good so there isn't too much going on to take in. That said, could a bump up to 2 cards be more meaningful?

I really do feel the Causes are the best thing here, because I suppose they appeal to both casual and serious players!

[spineflu]

...

...

...

Yes, this is a fine way to expand the game. Those who like a more strategic Dominion can always stick to Donald's cards, can't they?

bingo - same as how when people don't like Potion-cost cards, they don't play with Alchemy. Like I said in the Causes rules, it's your game and you should play it how you want.

re: what you're buying with Prohibition, you're adding a token delivery mechanic to a pile (similar to a conceptual Adventure token for +1 Coffers) but it affects all players (a la Embargo). What the prohibition tokens do is resolve when the Vice Raid and Valuable Contraband Causes come up, as well as provide a future design space thematically based around bootlegging/smuggling.

So 5 x players tokens go on the event, ready for taking. Are there going to be other ways to get them besides the Prohibited State? If there aren't then the number of tokens won't match up to the number of cards in the Prohibited pile in 3+ player games.
And what I meant with buying was, you pay $4 to use the Event, what happens?

You pay $4 to use the event - it allows you to place the Prohibited state on a pile. While the number of Prohibition tokens won't match the number of cards in the pile, the more limited number does make it so I don't have to buy an additional copy of Seaside to test with - for two or three player, i can just pull out the embargo tokens (for 4-6 i'll have to grab some 8mm cubes from my gamedesign supplies box). Why five per player? There's no real prize or penalty presently to having specifically more than 5; I figured five was a manageable amount, and thematically, if you were a bootlegger and got busted with five barrels of whiskey or ten, I don't think it really mattered in terms of penalty. Playtesting will tell whether I hit or missed the mark on that.

The mixed piles will be expanded upon in my second set, "Heresy"; for now they're largely cards that are variations on a theme, synergize in a way that doesn't necessitate one happening first a la split piles, and/or a collection of lower cost cards that would maybe be boring to have all three as separate kingdom cards but put them all together in one pile and you get interesting interactions. Having a nonconsistent supply pile can create interesting randomness in the (un)availability of the card you want.

This could well work, and with your intent on the player interaction side it looks like a good mechanic to explore. It might just be Slaughterhouse/Cattleman I don't really like - terminal Actions are the ones players want to get right in their decks, and these two behave quite differently. So, I could see a mixed pile of very similar and/or non-terminal cards working better.

This is also the reason for trash-from-supply being a thing in this - you can sift the supply piles.

Cow - how many of these are there? The premise looks good, storing these up to spike certain effects.

16 for 2-4 player, 20 for five player, 24 for six. For the time being I'm not going to be testing with 5+6 players.

[spineflu]

Backcountry Day 2:
We've got some more causes! We've got some more mixed piles! We've got some more things that care whether you're "Wanted"!

Causes
This is the rest of the "Vanilla" causes:



(masquerade counts as vanilla, right?)

and keeping with the trash-from-supply theme:

"regular" Kingdom Cards that care about Wanted





Mixed pile Kingdom Cards
Constable/Deputy (5 each)



Marquis/Magistrate (5 each)



Piper/Singer/Fiddler (4 each)

[Aquila]

re: what you're buying with Prohibition, you're adding a token delivery mechanic to a pile (similar to a conceptual Adventure token for +1 Coffers) but it affects all players (a la Embargo). What the prohibition tokens do is resolve when the Vice Raid and Valuable Contraband Causes come up, as well as provide a future design space thematically based around bootlegging/smuggling.

So 5 x players tokens go on the event, ready for taking. Are there going to be other ways to get them besides the Prohibited State? If there aren't then the number of tokens won't match up to the number of cards in the Prohibited pile in 3+ player games.
And what I meant with buying was, you pay $4 to use the Event, what happens?

You pay $4 to use the event - it allows you to place the Prohibited state on a pile. While the number of Prohibition tokens won't match the number of cards in the pile, the more limited number does make it so I don't have to buy an additional copy of Seaside to test with - for two or three player, i can just pull out the embargo tokens (for 4-6 i'll have to grab some 8mm cubes from my gamedesign supplies box). Why five per player? There's no real prize or penalty presently to having specifically more than 5; I figured five was a manageable amount, and thematically, if you were a bootlegger and got busted with five barrels of whiskey or ten, I don't think it really mattered in terms of penalty. Playtesting will tell whether I hit or missed the mark on that.

OK, I see the confusion now. The top and bottom line instructions on the Event are the wrong way round. The on-buy effect goes on top. The tokens can be however many then, as you say, because players can move Prohibited around the piles as they please so any pile can get tokens. The cost of $4 and a buy seems sensibly expensive so when someone makes a decision it likely stays for a while. The Event should probably also ignore the 2 landscapes per game rule, as it's essential to the functionality of some cards?

Cow - how many of these are there? The premise looks good, storing these up to spike certain effects.

16 for 2-4 player, 20 for five player, 24 for six. For the time being I'm not going to be testing with 5+6 players.

A fair number. Why not say 4 per player? With an even split: Milkmaid caps at $4, that's fair; Rustle powers down to Copper worth quite quickly; Slaughterhouse gets a Province once, which kinda emphasises that you use it once in the whole game, which seems to make Cattleman even more favourable. You could make a Slaughterhouse return the cows to their pile, if that would be balanced in an engine with 2 Rustles. Yes not so true to flavour but...cows breed.

Seeing how several of your cards are entirely dependent on each other, it looks like you're making this set to be playable just by itself. Trying to do all random games mixing it in with other sets isn't going to work too well too often. If Outlaw Village, for instance, gets selected without any way to get Wanted with it, it's probably best replaced?
It's not a bad thing to make sets like this at all, just most people on this forum consider playability in all random games a necessary criterion to good designs. I guess it doesn't really define 'Dominion expansion' if you can't add it to the official game. It's more like a spin-off.

Getting hopefully the right perspective, let's see these new cards:

A Time to Break Down - exactly $1 more or up to $1 more? Can players trash Coppers and get nothing back if no Poor House? Either way it's a tricky one to want to activate yourself, as you won't often know the entirety of your next hand. You 'may' trash yes, but there's still the gift to your opponents. It does fit the 'rare cases of usefulness' bill, but not very dramatically. So it's a bit...incidental.

A Time to Build Up - it's always impactful, but with variation each game; no +buys, a pile one really needs to win the split on, or the Prohibited pile, all give reason to want to trigger it. Good one.

A Time to Cast Away - losing a random card, just like Stampede, makes for randomness that appeals to the casual player. It even goes to their hand, so it's very impactful and suspensive. If you can both activate it and prepare your top card to pass on, that will be satisfying.

A Time to Lose - timing, how low down a pile this lands, affects its relevance quite a lot. Even considering this it's quite unexciting. Only junk will be trashed, and there's more of it early, so everyone is more likely to get benefit then. Later it can more likely benefit some of the players, but to milder effect as the deck is more developed.
Now I'm thinking with this, and possibly a Time to Build Up too, that it'd be more exciting affecting just the player who activates it. They'd be things to compete for.

A Time to Reap - now this isn't bad, a speed boost for someone to time getting when they're ahead. Treasures add a little more niche uses.

Out of time for now.

[Commodore Chuckles]

Prohibited is actually closer to an Adventures-style token, i just didnt want to have the rules for it buried in the rulebook, nor have it be player-specific. While there havent been non-player-anchored states, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel here - let states be attached to whatever and provide additional rules for what they're attached to.

Having something anchored to a pile rather than players feels different enough to me that it shouldn't be called a "State". I guess I can't force you to do anything though.

[spineflu]

Prohibited is actually closer to an Adventures-style token, i just didnt want to have the rules for it buried in the rulebook, nor have it be player-specific. While there havent been non-player-anchored states, there's no reason to reinvent the wheel here - let states be attached to whatever and provide additional rules for what they're attached to.

Having something anchored to a pile rather than players feels different enough to me that it shouldn't be called a "State". I guess I can't force you to do anything though.

I'll refer you to the first three words of the title. Don't take me too seriously, I may be wrong.
I did finally remember to fix stampede tho
Backcountry part 3: the real professor and mary-anne of it - the rest

Final two Causes



A Cattle card I missed the first time through


More reserve cards










And some normal action cards

[Gubump]

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

[segura]

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Indeed. Yet at $3 it would be strictly worse than Tunnel. So it has to provide 1/3VPs or something else to differentiate it enough from Estate and Tunnel.

[spineflu]

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Indeed. Yet at $3 it would be strictly worse than Tunnel. So it has to provide 1/3VPs or something else to differentiate it enough from Estate and Tunnel.

I mean, entertain this train of thought for a minute - its strictly better than Estates, so it simply inflates the value of Estate-equivalents of games that it's in. A run on it slows your deck down just as much as Estates, but if you can't split the pile on it (or gain the upper hand), you have to pivot and buy duchies/provinces, yeah? It changes up the relative value of Estates but that's about it. Maybe that's fine that it's the same price?

[scolapasta]

Portcullis doesn't need to be a Reaction, does it? It works exactly as it needs to just being an Action-Reserve.

(Reserve cards are all basically a "subtype" of reaction cards)

[segura]

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Indeed. Yet at $3 it would be strictly worse than Tunnel. So it has to provide 1/3VPs or something else to differentiate it enough from Estate and Tunnel.

It changes up the relative value of Estates but that's about it. Maybe that's fine that it's the same price?

On the 'strictly better' front I am fairly moderate. I believe that designing a card that is strictly better than an existing card is not a horrible design crime per se. It depends on whether the card one's design stands in relation to is singular, representitive of an entire card category or always present:
- You could e.g. do a Mine which provides +1 Action and the world would not end.
- But if you did a Village with an cherry on top for $3 that would be bad as there are many villages in Dominion so the price of $3 for vanilla Village is a relevant benchmark.
- Designing a card which outclasses a card which is present in all Kingdoms is even worse.

So yeah, even from a very lenient perspective you cannot design a card which provides 1 or 2 VPs that costs $2 or $3.

[math]

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Crops is strictly better than Estate and thus has to cost at least .

Indeed. Yet at $3 it would be strictly worse than Tunnel. So it has to provide 1/3VPs or something else to differentiate it enough from Estate and Tunnel.

It changes up the relative value of Estates but that's about it. Maybe that's fine that it's the same price?

On the 'strictly better' front I am fairly moderate. I believe that designing a card that is strictly better than an existing card is not a horrible design crime per se. It depends on whether the card one's design stands in relation to is singular, representitive of an entire card category or always present:
- You could e.g. do a Mine which provides +1 Action and the world would not end.
- But if you did a Village with an cherry on top for $3 that would be bad as there are many villages in Dominion so the price of $3 for vanilla Village is a relevant benchmark.
- Designing a card which outclasses a card which is present in all Kingdoms is even worse.

So yeah, even from a very lenient perspective you cannot design a card which provides 1 or 2 VPs that costs $2 or $3.

I think it's fine to design a card that is strictly better than Estate, especially since Estates aren't the strongest card to begin with (in most games the pile never gets touched until the last few turns).  Delve is strictly better than Silver (technically it's exactly Silver but costs less), and it doesn't hurt the game, it just modifies it so Silver is easier to get.  Crops seems fine as-is; nobody will buy Estates unless the Crops pile is gone, but I don't think that's a problem.

Edit: a word

[spineflu]

Here's the entirety of Backcountry in one actually quasiorganized post:

Causes (10 cards total, one each) Valuable Contraband Vice Raid Includes Prohibition event A Time To Sow A Time To Break Down A Time To Build Up A Time To Cast Away A Time To Lose A Time To Reap A Time For War A Time For Peace Causes are card-like things that are shuffled, then one is shuffled into each of the Kingdom piles prior to the start of the game (in the event of split piles (introduced in Dominion: Empires), you may either randomly slot in the cause or just not include a Cause in that pile; it's your game and you should play it the way you like.) Causes affect all players. When a cause is revealed on a Kingdom pile, it is set aside; at the end of the turn the Cause was revealed, it is resolved - do what the card says on it. After resolving the Cause, it is placed back in the game box, removing it from the game. When building the Causes deck (prior to shuffling/adding one to each supply pile), you may include a number of blank white cards if you'd like each pile to potentially not have a cause in it - when the blank card is revealed, simply return it to the box.

Events Prohibition Prohibited (state) (distributed via the Prohibition Event, similar to adventures tokens / embargo tokens, ten copies) Stampede Includes "Cow" - see Cattle section Abbey Witchhunt Fallow

Cattle Cow 16 for 2-4 players 20 for five players 24 for six players Rustle Milkmaid Meat Market Cattleman / Slaughterhouse (5 each, Mixed Pile) Cattleman Slaughterhouse

Kingdom Cards that care about Wanted Wanted (state) (six copies) Outlaw Village Sheriff Ruffian Autem Diver Deputy/ Constable (5 each, Mixed Pile) Deputy Constable Magistrate/ Marquis (5 each, Mixed Pile) Magistrate Marquis

Other kingdom cards Piper/ Singer/ Fiddler (Mixed Pile, 4 each) Piper Singer Fiddler Portcullis Puppet Theater Witch of the Woods Abbot Iron Mine Humble Village Ramshackle Bridge Pauper Bowler Farrier Effigy Manor Crops

[segura]

Crops seems fine as-ts; nobody will buy Estates unless the Crops pile is gone, but I don't think that's a problem.

It is as much or as little of a problem as Farming Village for $3. You can do it and unlike Crops it matters in very few games. But it is still a bad design principle to do  a card that is strictly better than an existing, non-singular card.

[spineflu]

Portcullis doesn't need to be a Reaction, does it? It works exactly as it needs to just being an Action-Reserve.

(Reserve cards are all basically a "subtype" of reaction cards)

not sure - i figured since reaction cards are activateable on other ppls turns, it was better practise to put it on; the existing Reserve cards are instants for your own turn, but reactions can be instants on other peoples' turns as well. I don't think it's a real deal breaker/game changer either way except with cards that care about other cards' types.

Likewise I'm not sure Witch of the Woods needs to be a Duration but given that it *is* passively doing a thing while on the tavern mat, I included it.

[spineflu]

Time for set two:
Heresy
Dominion Heresy is probably the most "normal" expansion of the three I've made.

It's intended as a sequel to Alchemy and Dark Ages, mechanically.
It uses VP tokens and potions, as well as coin tokens (more on that in the third Heresy post).

When playing with cards from Heresy, include Potions in the Supply even if there are no Potion-cost cards.

Mechanical themes include:
• VP tokens
• a new take on Potions
• Unique + Mixed piles
• Overpaying
• Trashing










Revised the wording on this after the notes I received from the WDC thread (contest #36?) - less ambiguous to what Curses are when you play multiple Heretics - they're just Silvers.





This provides the cost adjustment on the turn you play it and the next turn, because that's kind of subtle.

[spineflu]

part two of four

We've got a mixed pile, Grimoire / Manuscript
As you build your occult library, each grows more powerful. Also a good way to pivot from potion-treasure to $ treasure
Remember, this is a mixed pile, so here's a refresher on Mixed piles from Backcountry:

Mixed Piles are like split piles but their order doesn't matter. You can only buy or gain the top card of the pile. Mixed piles with two different cards have five each; mixed piles with three different cards have four each. While this goes against the conventional ten card pile, it does go with the original design choice of twelve cards per kingdom pile.

a potion cost trasher/vp token-er/sifter (updated)


A wishing well that turns handsize attacks to a comparatively painless fizzle


A potion overpay masterpiece that turns into gold. Thematically appropriate.

And then our first unique pile: Seals
As with the Knights pile, this is shuffled and all but the top card are placed face-down. When one is bought or gained, the next is flipped face-up.
Each has a symbol on its title banner that tells which symbol it has.
When you play with only two players, remove four Seals at random.

[segura]

Orrery, a terminal trasher that provides some deck control, would be weak at $3, let alone $3P.
Prophet is a potential source of non-terminal VPs that seems too easily exploitable in an engine.
Lead is an on-buy Treasure Trove that is far too weak. You end up with a Potion, x Coppers and x Golds in your deck.
The set collection thing about the Seals is a cool idea but I cannot imagine a situation in which I'd buy 2 Potions just for the sake of some lousy overpaying for VP. You are sometimes getting a second Potion with Alchemist or in the case of a Vineyard rush but Seals provide on average less VPs than Vineyards, i.e. they seem lees centralizing which make you less willing to get a second Potion (independent of the overpay thingy).

Your meta-problem seems to be that you seriously underestimate the opportunity cost of getting/having Potions. You have to buy a Potion and you have to deal with the disadvantage of an extra dead card in your deck.

[spineflu]

Orrery, a terminal trasher that provides some deck control, would be weak at $3, let alone $3P.
Prophet is a potential source of non-terminal VPs that seems too easily exploitable in an engine.
Lead is an on-buy Treasure Trove that is far too weak. You end up with a Potion, x Coppers and x Golds in your deck.
The set collection thing about the Seals is a cool idea but I cannot imagine a situation in which I'd buy 2 Potions just for the sake of some lousy overpaying for VP. You are sometimes getting a second Potion with Alchemist or in the case of a Vineyard rush but Seals provide on average less VPs than Vineyards, i.e. they seem lees centralizing which make you less willing to get a second Potion (independent of the overpay thingy).

Your meta-problem seems to be that you seriously underestimate the opportunity cost of getting/having Potions. You have to buy a Potion and you have to deal with the disadvantage of an extra dead card in your deck.

I think all of these will be addressed in day 3. except Orrery being overpriced. that should probably cost $2^ and be a cantrip. and Prophet being too easily exploitable. I don't know if I'm actually worried about that tho.

[spineflu]

Updated Orrery to be a cantrip and cost $2^

Part 3 of 4
Or: How to potions overpay without wrecking your deck.


Coffers but with potions.

Here's some vanilla applications:

an event that doesn't use a buy and has a variable cost


a combo treasure


a nonterminal cantrip-or-trasher


a festivillage

And a set of unique "occult" cards that borrowed from the Boons in terms of what does what.

[spineflu]

Last wave of cards for Heresy: aka variants on other peoples cards & why it's a dark ages sequel

First up:
Clergy. All trashers of various flavors.


this is the only double potion cost card in this set. Can probably run the Ruins pile very quickly in a deck with +Buys.
edit: realized I had a ping-pong problem where if two players had a Ward, it'd keep going forever. Added a two use max per Ward.


Made this a bit stronger since the weekly design contest. It also makes sense as a potion-remodel in this set.

There's five of each type of Ruins; If you've got Dark Ages, mix 'em on in. They're all at best situationally useful; tried to make a ruin for most other card archetypes, including treasure ruins, duration ruins, and reaction ruins.


And cards where I riffed on someone else's idea:

From Gubump's "Planetarium" thread.


don't remember who made this originally. I changed the first non-vanilla line to be specific (which helps with census treasures like philosopher's stone).


variant on kru5h's card "Ivory Tower"


variant on scolapasta's Archbishop that brings it a little closer to the original Bishop from prosperity and makes you play a minigame to get him back into your deck.


Based on kru5h's "Cell". pricing it with a potion, and making it only able to bury a Victory/Curse when initially playing it seems to even it out a bit.

[Fly-Eagles-Fly]

These look cool, I'll take a look at the other cards too, I'm just rejoining the forum after a few month's break.
I really like the Clergy, I'll maybe take a closer look at each specifically later. Two of the sisters have the colors switched.
Because of the way treasures are played, I think you can pretty much always play Cursed Coin, I think that might break it.
Crumbling Bridge looks much too strong.
Not sure why Review is worded like that, I think the original wording was better if I'm remembering it correctly.
Archbishop looks incorrectly worded, I'm not quite sure how to fix it.

Everything else is pretty cool.

[spineflu]

These look cool, I'll take a look at the other cards too, I'm just rejoining the forum after a few month's break.

I really like the Clergy, I'll maybe take a closer look at each specifically later. Two of the sisters have the colors switched.

Did the reversed colors with the Looter-Nuns, to make the most important types (Action, Attack, Victory) show up better.

Because of the way treasures are played, I think you can pretty much always play Cursed Coin, I think that might break it.

yeah but you still gotta deal with the curse from it. Also you can only play one per turn, you're SOL if you get ruined with several of them.

Crumbling Bridge looks much too strong.

?

Not sure why Review is worded like that, I think the original wording was better if I'm remembering it correctly.

this puts it more in line with how other intrigue-y choice cards are worded; I probably wouldn't have done it this way if I'd had more than two options, but here we are.

Archbishop looks incorrectly worded, I'm not quite sure how to fix it.

You think so too, huh? I had a couple more clumsy options ("total up the cost of all cards trashed this and gain 1% per $2 of the sum of cards trashed's cost"?) and am open to suggestions on how to fix that.

Thanks for checking these out!

[Fly-Eagles-Fly]

My wording on Crumbling Bridge was much too strong, but I do think it's too strong for a Ruin.

[spineflu]

My wording on Crumbling Bridge was much too strong, but I do think it's too strong for a Ruin.

Maybe change it to be a silvers-only Bridge?

[Fly-Eagles-Fly]

That should work.

[spineflu]

done, and also i changed the name because i didn't realize I'd used "Crumbling" twice.

[Gubump]

Another card I couldn't remember/find the OP on, this card died forum-wise among a pricing dispute (was priced at $6, that was too little; priced at $9 was too high; etc) - pricing it with a potion, and making it only able to bury a Victory/Curse when initially playing it seems to even it out a bit.

I think it's based on Kru5h's Cell:

Cell

This card is probably way too powerful. Comparable to Hireling I think, but cheaper.

You mention "making it only able to bury a Victory/Curse when initially playing it" as if you've done that, but your card only says "set aside a card." Assistant can bury any kind of card.

Also, you might want to word Assistant like Scheme: "At the start of each of your Clean-up phases, you may exchange a card you would discard from play with the set aside card," because as it's worded currently, it can allow you to get an indefinite amount of effective Hirelings.

[spineflu]

Another card I couldn't remember/find the OP on, this card died forum-wise among a pricing dispute (was priced at $6, that was too little; priced at $9 was too high; etc) - pricing it with a potion, and making it only able to bury a Victory/Curse when initially playing it seems to even it out a bit.

I think it's based on Kru5h's Cell:

Cell

This card is probably way too powerful. Comparable to Hireling I think, but cheaper.

You mention "making it only able to bury a Victory/Curse when initially playing it" as if you've done that, but your card only says "set aside a card." Assistant can bury any kind of card.

Also, you might want to word Assistant like Scheme: "At the start of each of your Clean-up phases, you may exchange a card you would discard from play with the set aside card," because as it's worded currently, it can allow you to get an indefinite amount of effective Hirelings.

Good call on the wording.
The only able to bury a Victory/Curse part - how do you get a Victory or Curse into play to swap in? (aside from Heretic or Inheritance, I guess?)

edit: realized what happened - we meant different things - I meant the only opportunity to bury vanilla green/purple was during the initial play; you thought i meant you could only bury green/purple during the initial play.

[spineflu]

I also took out a couple cards (well, one pile, and then a contingent pile) that people might find interesting.

Here's the pile:


aaaaand here's the contingent pile (it's a unique one):


Rules for Gods cards - at the end of the game, each one in your deck is worth -2VP; Any time they would be trashed or lost track of, they're returned to the Gods pile.

My rationale for removing them was 1) way too swingy/hard to balance 2) Ruins are funnier 3) the weird rules around KC/Throne Room-ing them 4) Would need to include Night card rules in a set that otherwise does not have Night Cards 5) weird rules unique to that pile.

Again, not part of Heresy, just a fun outtake while I prep for next weeks set, Syndicate

[Fly-Eagles-Fly]

Not showing up for me...
Never mind, forgot how long these can take sometimes.

[spineflu]

Syndicate
My last set, Syndicate, is a sequel to both Heresy + Backcountry, as well as Renaissance.
It cares about tokens (Coffers, Villagers, + Elixirs), and focuses on non-attack player interaction. It has mechanical subthemes of Potion-cost cards + Elixirs (introduced in Heresy), Durations, and Causes (introduced in Backcountry).

Here's part 1 of 4:

Mason's Lodge • $5 • Action - Duration
+1 Buy
Until the end of your next turn, cards cost $1 less (to a minimum of $0) for all players, and all players get +1 Buy at the start of their turn.
Whenever a player gains a card after their first, you get +1 Coffers.

Town Co-operative • $4 • Action - Duration
+1 Action
Until the end of your next turn, all players get +1 Action at the start of their turn. Whenever a player plays an Action after their first, you get +1 Villagers.

Borough • $4 • Action
+2 Coffers
+2 Villagers
+1 Elixir

Burglar • $4 • Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Coffers
Each opponent gets -1 Coffers. For each opponent who loses a Coffer this way, you get +1 Coffers.

Teller • $2 • Action
+2 Coffers
+1 Elixir
Trash this.

Dowager • $4 • Action
+2 Villagers
+1 Buy
+1 Elixir

[GendoIkari]

Isn't Burglar just a strictly better version of Baker that costs less?

[GendoIkari]

And I'm not sure what Elixir does, but Borough looks like a stronger version of Festival that costs less. Not strictly stronger because of the lack of +buy, but I'm pretty sure replacing +Action with +Villagers, and + with +Coffers more than makes up for that.

[Fly-Eagles-Fly]

Coffers but with potions.

I agree with GendoIkari, Borough and Burglar are strictly better (or close) than Festival and Baker respectively. I think they might be fine if they cost $6, but that might not be enough.

[GendoIkari]

Finally, Dowager (and Borough actually) looks very close to strictly better to plain old Potion. I know it's an action instead of a treasure, but that has both upsides and downsides. Other than the action vs treasure part, it's just way better.

[spineflu]

I mean, the dilemma with Potion has always been the opportunity cost - after you buy your potion-cost cards, it's dead weight (or tfb fodder); I want to make that less of a thing while still forcing players to figure out their way around dual currencies.
These won't be in every game, similar to how Delve isn't in every game.

That said, bumping Borough + Burglar up to $6 and Dowager down to +1 Villager seems prudent.

[GendoIkari]

I mean, the dilemma with Potion has always been the opportunity cost - after you buy your potion-cost cards, it's dead weight (or tfb fodder); I want to make that less of a thing while still forcing players to figure out their way around dual currencies.
These won't be in every game, similar to how Delve isn't in every game.

That said, bumping Borough + Burglar up to $6 and Dowager down to +1 Villager seems prudent.

With Dowager at for +1 Elixer, +1 Villager, +1 Buy, I still don't see why anyone would ever buy a Potion while Dowager is in the Kingdom.

[spineflu]

I mean, the dilemma with Potion has always been the opportunity cost - after you buy your potion-cost cards, it's dead weight (or tfb fodder); I want to make that less of a thing while still forcing players to figure out their way around dual currencies.
These won't be in every game, similar to how Delve isn't in every game.

That said, bumping Borough + Burglar up to $6 and Dowager down to +1 Villager seems prudent.

With Dowager at for +1 Elixer, +1 Villager, +1 Buy, I still don't see why anyone would ever buy a Potion while Dowager is in the Kingdom.

alt vp for potion cards specifically? (that's on wave #3)

But also, as I said, consider them like Delve. You don't pay full price for Silver in Delve games. Or it's at least super rare to (Goons, maybe?)

[segura]

I mean, the dilemma with Potion has always been the opportunity cost - after you buy your potion-cost cards, it's dead weight (or tfb fodder); I want to make that less of a thing while still forcing players to figure out their way around dual currencies.
These won't be in every game, similar to how Delve isn't in every game.

That said, bumping Borough + Burglar up to $6 and Dowager down to +1 Villager seems prudent.

With Dowager at for +1 Elixer, +1 Villager, +1 Buy, I still don't see why anyone would ever buy a Potion while Dowager is in the Kingdom.

Without wanting to argue that Dowager or Elixier are good designs, Apothecary does not mind and Alchemist actually wants a Potion in play (instead of a "virtual Potion").
So yeah, it is not like DXV did not adress the issue of Potion having a high opportunity cost and being a stop card in your deck. Virtual Potions are a fix to a non-existing problem. The way to do it properly is to make a card with Potion cost either optionally work with Potions like Apothecary and Alchemist but mainly make it very strong in multiples.

[spineflu]

k. make your own. it costs $0 to not be like that.  I have 18 more cards/CLTs in this set to show. you don't know where I'm going with this unless you somehow have access to my dominion spreadsheet.

I didn't like how Potion worked - to me, it was a problem; I changed it; my fan-cards are not canon, and there is no need for them to be canon.

[GendoIkari]

ErrinF?

[spineflu]

ErrinF?

i don't know what this means
edit: uh no

[GendoIkari]

ErrinF?

i don't know what this means
edit: uh no

I just felt like your most recent post reminded me of another poster who once showed off his fan expansion. segura (and I) were just trying to be helpful; your post came across as though you read our posts as insulting criticism rather than helpful suggestions.

[spineflu]

I get that yours was trying to be helpful. Segura's shown his ass a couple times now, being critical without any attempt at "helpful" suggestions.

[spineflu]

I get that some people who like how potions/potion costs work now aren't gonna like what I'm doing, and that's fine. Maybe they see what I'm doing as superfluous or detrimental to the game; that's also fine - I'm sure there's players who see fan expansions of any form as detrimental to the game, and I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to find a fan card forum member who hadn't found a card someone else made that they straight up hated.

I don't get why you'd bother to comment with something that was simply dedicated to tearing down what someone else was doing, with no attempt to critique or assist. Ignoring it is free. Making it not your problem is free.

I think it's problematic that Transmute has consistently ranked low because its opportunity cost with potions has been high. I think it's problematic that any discussion of potion-cost cards turns into a conversation about opportunity cost. I'm interested in exploring the design space of a game where a conversation like that doesn't happen, where instead it's about how to juggle multiple currencies in a game.

Maybe I should just make my own deckbuilder to do this, but I thought there was room to develop these ideas a bit more with an already established game, one which already has multiple currencies.

[theory]

If you post your expansion publicly, you should expect comments from people.  Being rude to people who post comments on your expansion - even if you don't like their comments or believe they could be more constructive - is unacceptable.

Please be more civil.