Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.  (Read 15611 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #25 on: March 23, 2021, 07:29:22 pm »
0

Followed this contest for a while. Love the option everyone has come up with. Not sure I have the smarts like you all do for coming up with cards and welcome feedback, but will give this a try
Zombie Witch
Cost $5, Action - Zombie
+2 cards
+1 action
Each other player reveals their hand and exiles a curse from their hand, If they can't then they gain a curse.

A combination between Coven and Old Witch

Welcome! Glad to have you here.

As long as you are open to hearing feedback, your ability to design balanced, fun cards will significantly increase over the next few contests/weeks.

The card you have designed looks fun, but it is very overpowering. The"+2 cards, +1 action" is a laboratory already, worth $5. Then you have added the witch/coven mix which each cost $5. That doesn't mean it should cost $10, but at least 6 or 7. However, attacks rarely have +action, so that multiples in the same turn rarely happens. So as a minimum, I'd drop the +action. And then we're getting closer to a balanced card.

But designing Zombies actually adds another trick... they have to be relatively equal in power (I'd guess equivalent to a $3 or maybe $4 card). This is so that someone playing a Necromancer actually needs to make an informed choice as to which Zombie to play. If your card were there, it would almost always be chosen over the other Zombies.
Logged
he/him

scolapasta

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 578
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #26 on: March 23, 2021, 07:42:48 pm »
+1

Followed this contest for a while. Love the option everyone has come up with. Not sure I have the smarts like you all do for coming up with cards and welcome feedback, but will give this a try
Zombie Witch
Cost $5, Action - Zombie
+2 cards
+1 action
Each other player reveals their hand and exiles a curse from their hand, If they can't then they gain a curse.

A combination between Coven and Old Witch

Welcome! Glad to have you here.

As long as you are open to hearing feedback, your ability to design balanced, fun cards will significantly increase over the next few contests/weeks.

The card you have designed looks fun, but it is very overpowering. The"+2 cards, +1 action" is a laboratory already, worth $5. Then you have added the witch/coven mix which each cost $5. That doesn't mean it should cost $10, but at least 6 or 7. However, attacks rarely have +action, so that multiples in the same turn rarely happens. So as a minimum, I'd drop the +action. And then we're getting closer to a balanced card.

But designing Zombies actually adds another trick... they have to be relatively equal in power (I'd guess equivalent to a $3 or maybe $4 card). This is so that someone playing a Necromancer actually needs to make an informed choice as to which Zombie to play. If your card were there, it would almost always be chosen over the other Zombies.

I would add that if it's too strong, then you also have an issue in Necromancer / Graverobber (or Lurker or Rogue) in that one player would have a chance to gain it.

re: attack with +1 action: true, but you could be fine for a balanced Zombie, since you can't play multiple.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #27 on: March 23, 2021, 08:18:00 pm »
0

I love the balance of cards submitted so far.

The official Zombies are well-designed to offer balance, choice, growth, etc.  One of them has you trash an Action card (setting up future possibilities for the next Necromancer) for great gain.  Another has a possibility of trashing an Action card, still at a moderate gain for the person who played it.  And the third is a catch-all remainder/fallback, being a cantrip.

Many of the submissions so far continue the same possibility of putting in more Action (and Treasure, for the Throne of the Dead) cards for future use.  (A note - Throne of the Dead itself doesn't set up for its future use, and it would have to rely on the luck/usage of Zombie Mason, if the kingdom was absent of other Trashers, so this is a definite drawback).  But I like the idea of encouraging growth of usage, not just putting a unique (possibly slightly powerful but not overpowering) card in the trash and calling it a Zombie.  On this point, my submission is actually very un-thematic or unbalanced, so I'll probably change it.

I am trying to figure out another card/thing that could use the Zombies, meaning the Necromancer wouldn't be the only thing putting them in play/trash.  It's a lot harder to work with this idea.  Faust's Event attempts to do this.  It looks like a really cool idea (effectively giving you an extra turn with only cards currently in the trash), and that adds extra variety/complexity to the submissions.  But the Event is very complex in the wording.  I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but any card you gain with that extra turn would not remain yours... it would go back into the trash after the second swap.  Alternatively, the upside to that event is that you could use a Zombie Apprentice and "trash" a Zombie Spy, Zombie Mason, or other card that was in the trash, which means it goes into your hand after the second swap... I'm guessing this is the main intention of the way the Event is worded?

Logged
he/him

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #28 on: March 23, 2021, 08:30:52 pm »
+4

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Edit - Updated - see my original post.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2021, 06:36:20 pm by mathdude »
Logged
he/him

Lackar

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Respect: +17
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #29 on: March 23, 2021, 08:33:45 pm »
+1

Followed this contest for a while. Love the option everyone has come up with. Not sure I have the smarts like you all do for coming up with cards and welcome feedback, but will give this a try
Zombie Witch
Cost $5, Action - Zombie
+2 cards
+1 action
Each other player reveals their hand and exiles a curse from their hand, If they can't then they gain a curse.

A combination between Coven and Old Witch

Welcome! Glad to have you here.

As long as you are open to hearing feedback, your ability to design balanced, fun cards will significantly increase over the next few contests/weeks.

The card you have designed looks fun, but it is very overpowering. The"+2 cards, +1 action" is a laboratory already, worth $5. Then you have added the witch/coven mix which each cost $5. That doesn't mean it should cost $10, but at least 6 or 7. However, attacks rarely have +action, so that multiples in the same turn rarely happens. So as a minimum, I'd drop the +action. And then we're getting closer to a balanced card.

But designing Zombies actually adds another trick... they have to be relatively equal in power (I'd guess equivalent to a $3 or maybe $4 card). This is so that someone playing a Necromancer actually needs to make an informed choice as to which Zombie to play. If your card were there, it would almost always be chosen over the other Zombies.

True I was going with a mix of the 2 and trying to come up with something different. If the +action is too much than it would make sense to leave it out. Old witch gives 3, gives curse and lets you trash a curse and coven gives action.  In relative of 3-4 cost than maybe only +2 cards instead.
Definitely up for constructive criticism. Only way to create cards that are fun and that people would say they would like to play. And will always listen to what people say, suggest or options. Only way to learn. Thanks for the thought and I will try to design a card pic also later.
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #30 on: March 23, 2021, 08:40:07 pm »
0

Followed this contest for a while. Love the option everyone has come up with. Not sure I have the smarts like you all do for coming up with cards and welcome feedback, but will give this a try
Zombie Witch
Cost $5, Action - Zombie
+2 cards
+1 action
Each other player reveals their hand and exiles a curse from their hand, If they can't then they gain a curse.

A combination between Coven and Old Witch

Welcome! Glad to have you here.

As long as you are open to hearing feedback, your ability to design balanced, fun cards will significantly increase over the next few contests/weeks.

The card you have designed looks fun, but it is very overpowering. The"+2 cards, +1 action" is a laboratory already, worth $5. Then you have added the witch/coven mix which each cost $5. That doesn't mean it should cost $10, but at least 6 or 7. However, attacks rarely have +action, so that multiples in the same turn rarely happens. So as a minimum, I'd drop the +action. And then we're getting closer to a balanced card.

But designing Zombies actually adds another trick... they have to be relatively equal in power (I'd guess equivalent to a $3 or maybe $4 card). This is so that someone playing a Necromancer actually needs to make an informed choice as to which Zombie to play. If your card were there, it would almost always be chosen over the other Zombies.

The fact that it can only be played once in a turn does ameliorate that somewhat, but as is, I agree that it's still overpowered.  Also, the cost should probably be the same as the other Zombies.  For Zombies, cost isn't really important most of the time since you can't buy them (it is relevant for things like Graverobber or Rogue gaining from the trash - though that only cares about the range $3-$6 - or trash-for-benefit if you've already gained from the trash)

Avoiding a Curse by Exiling it is an interesting idea.  It's not nearly as good as Old Witch's trashing, but if there's no trashing in the kingdom, it's still better than nothing, since it gets it out of your deck
Logged
They/them

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #31 on: March 23, 2021, 08:42:39 pm »
0





This is an attack that uses a double-sided State.  Because it uses a State, it does not stack.  The attack gives no immediate advantage to the person who plays it, which seems fair to me since it's potentially a very strong attack.  If you do not have either state, then you take Bitten.  At the start of your turn, you can trash a card costing $4 or more from your hand to get rid of Bitten, otherwise, the bite progresses to Infected.  When you're Infected, you take on debt the next time you buy a card.  Note, however, that since it scales with what you're buying, you can simply buy a Copper to avoid taking on debt, especially if you have extra buys, so that you can use the other buys on cards you actually want.  On the other hand, if your first buy after being Infected is, say, a Colony, then you're stuck with 5D!

Cost reduction interacts with this in interesting ways.  Canal and a Bridge Troll in play make Bitten more expensive to deal with, but cost reduction also reduces the amount of debt you take on if you progress to Infected.  Also, if you don't buy anything at all, you remain Infected, and your opponent can't hurt you with Zombie Apocalypse.  Note that the $4 cost means that a fortress in hand (assuming no Canal or Bridge Troll) effectively makes you immune to this attack.  Also, this could sometimes even help you with some on-trash effects.  But, most of the time it would be a fairly strong attack

I'm starting to think this might be overpowered
Logged
They/them

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #32 on: March 23, 2021, 08:49:29 pm »
0

--snip--

Thanks for the thought and I will try to design a card pic also later.

If you've never done such before, here is the process I use (some people use other image hosting sites):

1. https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/
(enter all relevant information for the card, including the option to use an image though I often skip an image)

2. download card (button near bottom left)

3. upload that dowloaded image to imgur.com/upload

4. click the 3 dots (...), "Get share links", then click the "copy link" by BBCode (Forums)

5. you can just paste that directly in your reply here, but you need to modify it or it will show up huge
(it pastes as "[ img ] link to imgur image here [ /img ]" but you have to add a size to the opening tag, such as "[ img width=250 ]" - I've added spaces so it shows up for you here - when you post it, don' t include any spaces)
Logged
he/him

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #33 on: March 23, 2021, 08:57:34 pm »
+1





This is an attack that uses a double-sided State.  Because it uses a State, it does not stack.  The attack gives no immediate advantage to the person who plays it, which seems fair to me since it's potentially a very strong attack.  If you do not have either state, then you take Bitten.  At the start of your turn, you can trash a card costing $4 or more from your hand to get rid of Bitten, otherwise, the bite progresses to Infected.  When you're Infected, you take on debt the next time you buy a card.  Note, however, that since it scales with what you're buying, you can simply buy a Copper to avoid taking on debt, especially if you have extra buys, so that you can use the other buys on cards you actually want.  On the other hand, if your first buy after being Infected is, say, a Colony, then you're stuck with 5D!

Cost reduction interacts with this in interesting ways.  Canal and a Bridge Troll in play make Bitten more expensive to deal with, but cost reduction also reduces the amount of debt you take on if you progress to Infected.  Also, if you don't buy anything at all, you remain Infected, and your opponent can't hurt you with Zombie Apocalypse.  Note that the $4 cost means that a fortress in hand (assuming no Canal or Bridge Troll) effectively makes you immune to this attack.  Also, this could sometimes even help you with some on-trash effects.  But, most of the time it would be a fairly strong attack

I'm starting to think this might be overpowered

I was wondering the same thing when I first read it.  Compare it to Skulk, which is another attack that gives no real benefit to the person playing it - it only gives a Hex, which is comparably weaker than Bitten/Infected (though Skulk does give +Buy which is otherwise absent in some kingdoms).  The idea is really cool and thematic.

What about dropping Bitten's trashing threshold down to $3 instead of $4 (allowing the trashing of silver or an early-game Action that has outlived its purpose if you are lucky enough to get one in hand)?  And/or maybe drop the debt down to 1 per $3 of the gained card instead of 1 per $2 (now giving a max of 2 debt, other than platinum/colony which give 3)?  These options seem more balanced with the Hexes' power level, which makes sense given the comparison in price to Skulk.

The fact that it gives no benefit to the player playing it, and that it doesn't stack (in 3+ player games) does help reduce its power.
Logged
he/him

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #34 on: March 23, 2021, 09:04:43 pm »
+1

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
Logged
They/them

spineflu

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1365
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • Head Empty, Heart Worms, Can't Lose
  • Respect: +1349
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #35 on: March 23, 2021, 09:21:33 pm »
0

--snip--

Thanks for the thought and I will try to design a card pic also later.

If you've never done such before, here is the process I use (some people use other image hosting sites):

1. https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/
(enter all relevant information for the card, including the option to use an image though I often skip an image)

2. download card (button near bottom left)

3. upload that dowloaded image to imgur.com/upload

4. click the 3 dots (...), "Get share links", then click the "copy link" by BBCode (Forums)

5. you can just paste that directly in your reply here, but you need to modify it or it will show up huge
(it pastes as "[ img ] link to imgur image here [ /img ]" but you have to add a size to the opening tag, such as "[ img width=250 ]" - I've added spaces so it shows up for you here - when you post it, don' t include any spaces)

you can also just copy it from the card generator, paste it @ imgur if you don't want to have stray dominion cards floating around your hard drive.
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #36 on: March 23, 2021, 09:55:10 pm »
+1





This is an attack that uses a double-sided State.  Because it uses a State, it does not stack.  The attack gives no immediate advantage to the person who plays it, which seems fair to me since it's potentially a very strong attack.  If you do not have either state, then you take Bitten.  At the start of your turn, you can trash a card costing $4 or more from your hand to get rid of Bitten, otherwise, the bite progresses to Infected.  When you're Infected, you take on debt the next time you buy a card.  Note, however, that since it scales with what you're buying, you can simply buy a Copper to avoid taking on debt, especially if you have extra buys, so that you can use the other buys on cards you actually want.  On the other hand, if your first buy after being Infected is, say, a Colony, then you're stuck with 5D!

Cost reduction interacts with this in interesting ways.  Canal and a Bridge Troll in play make Bitten more expensive to deal with, but cost reduction also reduces the amount of debt you take on if you progress to Infected.  Also, if you don't buy anything at all, you remain Infected, and your opponent can't hurt you with Zombie Apocalypse.  Note that the $4 cost means that a fortress in hand (assuming no Canal or Bridge Troll) effectively makes you immune to this attack.  Also, this could sometimes even help you with some on-trash effects.  But, most of the time it would be a fairly strong attack

I'm starting to think this might be overpowered

I was wondering the same thing when I first read it.  Compare it to Skulk, which is another attack that gives no real benefit to the person playing it - it only gives a Hex, which is comparably weaker than Bitten/Infected (though Skulk does give +Buy which is otherwise absent in some kingdoms).  The idea is really cool and thematic.

What about dropping Bitten's trashing threshold down to $3 instead of $4 (allowing the trashing of silver or an early-game Action that has outlived its purpose if you are lucky enough to get one in hand)?  And/or maybe drop the debt down to 1 per $3 of the gained card instead of 1 per $2 (now giving a max of 2 debt, other than platinum/colony which give 3)?  These options seem more balanced with the Hexes' power level, which makes sense given the comparison in price to Skulk.

The fact that it gives no benefit to the player playing it, and that it doesn't stack (in 3+ player games) does help reduce its power.

Good idea.  I'll go with that revision to the states.  I've edited the post to reflect that now
Logged
They/them

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #37 on: March 23, 2021, 10:25:45 pm »
0

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky

Since there's no "leaving it there" clause as with Necromancer, it seems like it would play oddly with cards like Experiment.  You play the Experiment.  It returns itself to the Supply, and Zombie Captain is unable to set it aside.  However, since there's no "if you did" clause on that, it would still be able to be played the second time, but now Zombie Captain can't return it to the trash, since it's already returned to the Supply (and conceivably have even been gained since then!).  And with self-trashing cards that have an "if you did" clause, you'd be able to get their effects on the second turn, but not the first.  E.g., play a Pillage from the trash.  The first turn nothing happens - it's already in the trash.  But then you set it aside and play it again on your second turn.  This time, it is able to trash itself, so you get the attack (and then Zombie Captain is unable to return it to the trash, since it put itself there, but that wouldn't really have any practical effect)

Maybe something like this to avoid both effects: "Set aside an Action card from the trash under this and play it, leaving it there.  At the start of your next turn, return it to the trash and play it, leaving it there".  Wording's a bit awkward (especially the repeating of "leaving it there"), but I think it gets its point across without causing confusion
Logged
They/them

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #38 on: March 23, 2021, 10:44:24 pm »
+1

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).
Logged
he/him

scolapasta

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 578
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #39 on: March 23, 2021, 11:53:02 pm »
+1

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).

It would also allow you to play face down cards Necromancer has already played, which seems not desired.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

majiponi

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 823
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #40 on: March 24, 2021, 03:46:34 am »
0

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:



Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).

It would also allow you to play face down cards Necromancer has already played, which seems not desired.

Can Necromancer play Duration cards?
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #41 on: March 24, 2021, 03:48:43 am »
+1

That seems weak compared to the other Zombies. The floor is a Ruined Library, the ceiling is a Village, and the Ceiling is pretty hard to get. I'd make it +2 Cards instead, so that the ceiling is a lab.

I think you are right. There is a quite complex interaction between Necromancer - Pet Sematary - trashed Action card - copy of it in player's hand - that I haven't fully thought out. While Pet Sematary as is, would work well enough with trashed terminal Action cards, it doesn't give benefits for non-terminal Action cards.

When designing Pet Sematary, I thought about adding a constant +$1 (i.e. on top/without requiring a trashed copy) to it. It would make Pet Sematary fairly attractive already at the start of the game, but wouldn't make Necromancer too powerful. The floor would be a non-terminal Copper (as one of 4+ options) and the ceiling would be a Bazaar. This looks more exciting than the Horse/Lab variant, which becomes a bit abundant nowadays.

What do you (or anyone else) think about this version?
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #42 on: March 24, 2021, 03:50:56 am »
0

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:

Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).

It would also allow you to play face down cards Necromancer has already played, which seems not desired.

Can Necromancer play Duration cards?

No, but is that relevant here? It seems that Zombie Captain is an alternative to Necromancer, not a target.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2021, 03:52:08 am by gambit05 »
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #43 on: March 24, 2021, 03:52:18 am »
0


Can Necromancer play Duration cards?
[/quote]

no
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #44 on: March 24, 2021, 07:36:29 am »
+1

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:

Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).

It would also allow you to play face down cards Necromancer has already played, which seems not desired.

Can Necromancer play Duration cards?

No, but is that relevant here? It seems that Zombie Captain is an alternative to Necromancer, not a target.

I think the idea was that Zombie Captain also should not be able to play duration cards. My card is going to get very wordy. I'll update once I can sit at a computer and look at it.
Logged
he/him

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +634
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #45 on: March 24, 2021, 08:23:08 am »
+3

This a fun challenge, but I'm finding it hard to come up with a good one.

One of the considerations for me is that adding another Zombie makes Necromancer stronger.  As such, I could have created a weak Zombie so that Necromancer isn't overpowered.  Instead, I'm proposing that as part of setup, players would shuffle the four Zombies and randomly select three to play with.


Original:


Quote from: Zombie Knight
$3 - Action - Attack - Zombie
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest.  If a card is trashed by this, trash a Necromancer or Zombie you have in play.

So the trashing attack will usually force you to trash your Necromancer.  The exception would be if you are able to take Zombie Knight out of the trash and play it, in which case Zombie Knight will trash itself.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2021, 01:28:43 pm by Timinou »
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #46 on: March 24, 2021, 08:46:22 am »
0

Replacing my submission with this, new Kingdom Action card:

Hmm ... the set-aside has an interesting effect in that it blocks your opponent from using the same card until you're done with it, but I can't really think of any alternative that wouldn't make tracking tricky
The restriction that an opponent can't use it is intentional. I'll look at your wording in your other post and hopefully update my submission tomorrow (on phone now and heading to bed).

It would also allow you to play face down cards Necromancer has already played, which seems not desired.

Can Necromancer play Duration cards?

No, but is that relevant here? It seems that Zombie Captain is an alternative to Necromancer, not a target.

I think the idea was that Zombie Captain also should not be able to play duration cards. My card is going to get very wordy. I'll update once I can sit at a computer and look at it.

I see. I think I took the question too literally. If adding "non-Duration" is the only problem, I think that bit would still fit without making the text too wordy. 
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #47 on: March 24, 2021, 08:49:23 am »
0

This a fun challenge, but I'm finding it hard to come up with a good one.

One of the considerations for me is that adding another Zombie makes Necromancer stronger.  As such, I could have created a weak Zombie so that Necromancer isn't overpowered.  Instead, I'm proposing that as part of setup, players would shuffle the four Zombies and randomly select three to play with.



Quote from: Zombie Knight
$3 - Action - Attack - Zombie
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest.
If a card is trashed by this, trash a Necromancer that you have in play.  If you can't, trash this.

So the trashing attack will usually force you to trash your Necromancer.  The exception would be if you are able to take Zombie Knight out of the trash and play it, in which case Zombie Knight will trash itself.

Interesting, but quite harsh. Wouldn't this be always favored over the other Zombies?

Edit: On a second thought, maybe make it less brutal by narrowing the range to "$3 or $4"? Also, what about in the final part, Exiling instead of trashing the Zombie Knight? This would avoid abusing Zombie Knight when it is out of the trash.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2021, 08:54:11 am by gambit05 »
Logged

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +634
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #48 on: March 24, 2021, 08:54:45 am »
0

This a fun challenge, but I'm finding it hard to come up with a good one.

One of the considerations for me is that adding another Zombie makes Necromancer stronger.  As such, I could have created a weak Zombie so that Necromancer isn't overpowered.  Instead, I'm proposing that as part of setup, players would shuffle the four Zombies and randomly select three to play with.



Quote from: Zombie Knight
$3 - Action - Attack - Zombie
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest.
If a card is trashed by this, trash a Necromancer that you have in play.  If you can't, trash this.

So the trashing attack will usually force you to trash your Necromancer.  The exception would be if you are able to take Zombie Knight out of the trash and play it, in which case Zombie Knight will trash itself.

Interesting, but quite harsh. Wouldn't this be always favored over the other Zombies?

Possibly.  However, if you are always playing Zombie Knight, then you will trash all your Necromancers.  Depending on which cards end up in the trash, it may be more optimal to not trash your Necromancers.
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #109: Raise the dead.
« Reply #49 on: March 24, 2021, 09:08:35 am »
0

This a fun challenge, but I'm finding it hard to come up with a good one.

One of the considerations for me is that adding another Zombie makes Necromancer stronger.  As such, I could have created a weak Zombie so that Necromancer isn't overpowered.  Instead, I'm proposing that as part of setup, players would shuffle the four Zombies and randomly select three to play with.



Quote from: Zombie Knight
$3 - Action - Attack - Zombie
Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of their deck, trashes one of them costing from $3 to $6, and discards the rest.
If a card is trashed by this, trash a Necromancer that you have in play.  If you can't, trash this.

So the trashing attack will usually force you to trash your Necromancer.  The exception would be if you are able to take Zombie Knight out of the trash and play it, in which case Zombie Knight will trash itself.

Interesting, but quite harsh. Wouldn't this be always favored over the other Zombies?

Possibly.  However, if you are always playing Zombie Knight, then you will trash all your Necromancers.  Depending on which cards end up in the trash, it may be more optimal to not trash your Necromancers.

It seems that your card is more complex than I originally thought. Better forget about my previous comment. I still don't like the idea too much to have a trashing-Attack Zombie. On the other hand, my statement that I find the card interesting still holds.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 21 queries.