Print

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

[Timinou]

I think it's an improvement, but wouldn't it be simpler to just give +2 Cards when you play a snow and not allow you to play a snow from your hand? It's identical for the first Snow.

I would have to make Dogsled non-terminal in order to allow a player to then play a Snow from their hand after playing Dogsled.  I could take it in that direction, but I like that the vanilla bonus is similar to other canine-themed cards like Faithful Hound and Sheepdog.

EDIT: I could also make Dogsled a Reaction card to reach the same effect.  I'll mull it over but I'm not too enthused about having more than one dividing line and additional text. 

[Something_Smart]

[Timinou]

Mountaineers want to be Tortured.

[segura]

I think those Mountaineer dudes are nasty capitalists.

[Something_Smart]

They're also really hard workers; look at how much they like to Toil.

[Commodore Chuckles]

$4 is too cheap for this - if you play it from a 5-card hand, it's a terminal Gold

[BBobb]

$4 is too cheap for this - if you play it from a 5-card hand, it's a terminal Gold

I agree with this. Also, the Snows aren't as bad with this, since they essentially are one-shot coppers if you have this in your hand. So, yeah, probably too powerful.

[anordinaryman]

$4 is too cheap for this - if you play it from a 5-card hand, it's a terminal Gold

Not to mention it junks opponents on gain with 2 Snows. I understand that  this card turns snows into coppers that disappear essentially. But that's only if you line them up. In reality the 2 snows are junk on gain, and on gain attacking is very strong as opposed to on-play attack. Just look at how terrible of a card IGG is on play and then look at its price point. On the other hand, Snows are a lot better than curses.

I think due to this junking, the card could be +$5 at a cost of $4 or $5, or lower the junking to a single snow and raise the price up to 6 or 7. Consider lower the junking to a single snow also.

This is a really cool card. It's a lot like Poor House, which is a fun card.

[Xen3k]

<Not an entry>

Snow Storm - $5
Night - Duration
At the start of your next turn, set aside any number of cards from your hand to gain that many Snow. At the start of your Action phase, play the set aside cards in any order.

I am really liking the concept of Snow and what it can add to a design. So, just for fun, I made this design. I am not submitting this officially because I have no idea just how busted this is. I just thought it was a really cool concept and wanted to share it.

Edit: Updated to try and make it less broken, for fun.

Old Version

[Timinou]

If you play Snow Storm but draw a hand without any Action cards for your next turn, do you still gain a Snow because of the rounding up?

In any case, I think the penalty should be steeper (i.e. a Snow per set-aside card).  Otherwise, it can get pretty strong since you essentially won't have any terminal Actions with this in play. 

[Xen3k]

If you play Snow Storm but draw a hand without any Action cards for your next turn, do you still gain a Snow because of the rounding up?

In any case, I think the penalty should be steeper (i.e. a Snow per set-aside card).  Otherwise, it can get pretty strong since you essentially won't have any terminal Actions with this in play.

You would not get a Snow, unless the logic for rounding in Dominion is different than I assume. I did have a  version that handed out a Snow for every card set aside, but was unsure if that would be too harsh. This is basically a Night phase at the start of your turn with all your Actions acting as Night cards. I did not want multiples of these doubling up, but I think maybe they do, so that is another design flaw. Overall I really could not gauge the power level of the card, so went with something else.

[Timinou]

If you play Snow Storm but draw a hand without any Action cards for your next turn, do you still gain a Snow because of the rounding up?

In any case, I think the penalty should be steeper (i.e. a Snow per set-aside card).  Otherwise, it can get pretty strong since you essentially won't have any terminal Actions with this in play.

You would not get a Snow, unless the logic for rounding in Dominion is different than I assume.

Oh, you're right.  I just had another brain fart (I've been having them all week).

I did have a  version that handed out a Snow for every card set aside, but was unsure if that would be too harsh. This is basically a Night phase at the start of your turn with all your Actions acting as Night cards. I did not want multiples of these doubling up, but I think maybe they do, so that is another design flaw. Overall I really could not gauge the power level of the card, so went with something else.

I think that since players can choose how many to set aside, they can still control how much they self-junk.  I think a good deck can handle a little bit of Snow, especially since you can clear it away pretty easily.

[Xen3k]

If you play Snow Storm but draw a hand without any Action cards for your next turn, do you still gain a Snow because of the rounding up?

In any case, I think the penalty should be steeper (i.e. a Snow per set-aside card).  Otherwise, it can get pretty strong since you essentially won't have any terminal Actions with this in play.

You would not get a Snow, unless the logic for rounding in Dominion is different than I assume.

Oh, you're right.  I just had another brain fart (I've been having them all week).

I did have a  version that handed out a Snow for every card set aside, but was unsure if that would be too harsh. This is basically a Night phase at the start of your turn with all your Actions acting as Night cards. I did not want multiples of these doubling up, but I think maybe they do, so that is another design flaw. Overall I really could not gauge the power level of the card, so went with something else.

I think that since players can choose how many to set aside, they can still control how much they self-junk.  I think a good deck can handle a little bit of Snow, especially since you can clear it away pretty easily.

Good points. I went ahead and updated the post, for fun of course. I also bumped up the price, just in case it is still broken, and made the wording explicit so double Snow Storm is not beneficial.

[Gubump]

<Not an entry>

1. The start of your turn IS the start of your Action phase, so having an at-the-start-of-turn effect immediately followed by an at-the-start-of-your-Action-phase effect is just confusing.
2. This is incredibly weak. I have an old, playtested Fan Card that was

+1 Card
Set aside any number of Action cards. Play the set aside cards in any order.
- Action

And it was incredibly weak. As in, worse than Harvest or even Stash weak. This is much worse, because not only is it dead the turn you draw it instead of working immediately, but it also floods you with junk. The only advantage Snow Storm has over that already terrible card is that it can't be drawn dead.

EDIT: Realized that last part isn't true, it also has the advantage that it doesn't take an Action to play the set aside cards. Still weak for , though.

Also, accidental pun:

cool concept

[NoMoreFun]

Frozen Throne
Action - $5
+1 Card
You may play an Action from your hand twice. If you did, and it's still in play, gain a Snow.

[Xen3k]

<Not an entry>

1. The start of your turn IS the start of your Action phase, so having an at-the-start-of-turn effect immediately followed by an at-the-start-of-your-Action-phase effect is just confusing.
2. This is incredibly weak. I have an old, playtested Fan Card that was

+1 Card
Set aside any number of Action cards. Play the set aside cards in any order.
- Action

And it was incredibly weak. As in, worse than Harvest or even Stash weak. This is much worse, because not only is it dead the turn you draw it instead of working immediately, but it also floods you with junk. The only advantage Snow Storm has over that already terrible card is that it can't be drawn dead.

EDIT: Realized that last part isn't true, it also has the advantage that it doesn't take an Action to play the set aside cards. Still weak for , though.

Yeah, I could not gauge the power of it. Also, I was hoping there would be a step before the Action phase, because using the old wording one Snow Storm would resolve, and then the next, but it would basically be that playtest card you had. Glad I went with the other card.

Also, accidental pun:

cool concept

lol, definitely accidental.

[alion8me]

Hearth

+4 Cards
+1 Buy
-
Instead of paying this card's cost, you may gain 3 Snow.

$7 - Action

Small pedantic thing. It should say "gain 3 Snows"

Thank you for noticing that - it's fixed now.

[emtzalex]

$4 is too cheap for this - if you play it from a 5-card hand, it's a terminal Gold

Not to mention it junks opponents on gain with 2 Snows. I understand that  this card turns snows into coppers that disappear essentially. But that's only if you line them up. In reality the 2 snows are junk on gain, and on gain attacking is very strong as opposed to on-play attack. Just look at how terrible of a card IGG is on play and then look at its price point. On the other hand, Snows are a lot better than curses.

I think due to this junking, the card could be +$5 at a cost of $4 or $5, or lower the junking to a single snow and raise the price up to 6 or 7. Consider lower the junking to a single snow also.

This is a really cool card. It's a lot like Poor House, which is a fun card.

This is even more powerful with Cathedral, which pushes the base value of the card up to $4, and can use the Snow as junk to trash. On a $3 / $4 open you could open with Cathedral and Mountaineer, and after the first shuffle you would only need to draw Mountaineer with two copper/snow in order to buy a Gold. There is also a decent chance of getting a second Mountaineer, which leads to a non-negligible possibility of getting a Province after your second shuffle while dumping 4 junk cards on your opponent.

I agree that it is cool, but dangerous if it can be bought so early.

[Something_Smart]

Thanks for all the feedback on my card. I don't really consider it a junker, the same way Messenger gaining a Curse is not a junker; it applies to all players equally, so it just slows the game down.

It's a terminal gold if used for big money, yes, but so is Smithy on average if your money density is better than $1/card (which it had better be if you're playing money). I don't expect that Mountaineer money will beat a decently-constructed engine. I can test this if people are skeptical.

[segura]

That analysis is too superficial as the Snows hurt the player who bought this card less than the other players. A terminal Gold at $5 is too weak but at $4 it is likely too strong (mainly due to opening issues, in the midgame it is less of an issue) ... and this is more than a terminal Gold.

[Carline]

UPDATE:



Feedbacks are always welcome!

is the discard this effect meant to stop it from working on the next turn? because rn it doesn't

I was in doubt about this rule. I don't like so much a postponed effect without a marker. Discard is to make it draw only one card.

If you want it to not have its next turn effect if you discard it, you could have
You may trash a card from your hand to gain a card costing exactly more than it.
Each other player gains a Snow.
At the start of your next turn, if this is still in play, each other player gains a Snow.
EDIT: Added still thanks to Faust.

Thank you both!

Updated to suggested wording.

UPDATE:

[faust]

Thanks for all the feedback on my card. I don't really consider it a junker, the same way Messenger gaining a Curse is not a junker; it applies to all players equally, so it just slows the game down.

It's a terminal gold if used for big money, yes, but so is Smithy on average if your money density is better than $1/card (which it had better be if you're playing money). I don't expect that Mountaineer money will beat a decently-constructed engine. I can test this if people are skeptical.

I don't think the main worry about your card is that it's too good in Big Money; people are just using that example as an easy baseline. Mountaineer is clearly way more busted in an engine, if you have any decent trashing or sifting.

[Fragasnap]

Ice Cutter
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Gain a card costing up to $6. If it costs at least $5, gain a Snow. If you haven't played a Snow this turn, gain a Snow.

Ice Cutter is a super-Workshop at the same price that gives you Snow for the privilege.
You can dodge the first Snow by gaining a card at Workshop's normal price range.
You can dodge the second Snow by aligning Ice Cutter with a Snow.

[BBobb]

Ice Cutter
Types: Action
Cost: $3
Gain a card costing up to $6. If it cost at least $5, gain a Snow. If you haven't played a Snow this turn, gain a Snow.

Ice Cutter is a super-Workshop at the same price that gives you Snow for the privilege.
You can dodge the first Snow by gaining a card at Workshop's normal price range.
You can dodge the second Snow by aligning Ice Cutter with a Snow.

I would say "if it costs" instead of "if it cost" just to be consistent with official cards.

[spineflu]

wot Chameleon loves this