Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play  (Read 18711 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5300
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #75 on: April 07, 2021, 08:26:24 am »
+1



I didn't manage to get the tool to write 'this stays in play' in italics. I assume it's supposed to happen automatically, but it didn't. :)

Stupid question, but does this mean that if i, say, have drawn my entire deck and then gain a silver to discard and then draw a card, that i get +1 Coffers? And that one could do this multiple times?

yup

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #76 on: April 07, 2021, 09:28:45 am »
+1


Are you aware that exchanging by default means that the exchanged card is put to the discard pile (and the other one usually back to its pile)? Also, it is not clear to me which of the 2 exchanged cards gives the bonus. Aside of that, quite a lot of text (or at least a lot of lines).

Its supposed to be that the card you put under Chamber is the one that gives a bonus . i don't really understand the first point you mnade

Here are the rules about exchange from the wiki.

So, if you follow the official rules, using the term exchange, the card from hand would go back to its pile and the other one would go to the discard pile, or maybe the other way around, I am not sure, as in your case you "exchange" 2 cards that both already belong to the player. Anyway, is that your intention, or if not what is it?

Ummm. I don't know and I'm confused right now. sorry.
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #77 on: April 07, 2021, 09:46:57 am »
0


Are you aware that exchanging by default means that the exchanged card is put to the discard pile (and the other one usually back to its pile)? Also, it is not clear to me which of the 2 exchanged cards gives the bonus. Aside of that, quite a lot of text (or at least a lot of lines).

Its supposed to be that the card you put under Chamber is the one that gives a bonus . i don't really understand the first point you mnade

Here are the rules about exchange from the wiki.

So, if you follow the official rules, using the term exchange, the card from hand would go back to its pile and the other one would go to the discard pile, or maybe the other way around, I am not sure, as in your case you "exchange" 2 cards that both already belong to the player. Anyway, is that your intention, or if not what is it?

Ummm. I don't know and I'm confused right now. sorry.

Too much fika?

My guess is that you want to replace the set-aside card with one from your hand. A few days ago I commented on another card with a long text and a similar "exchange" mechanic and suggested to introduce the keyword "replace", which can be explained in an accompanying note. It would make it much simpler and less wordy. I haven't heard back from the other user, so don't know what happened there (too lazy to look back right now).

If you do not want to use "replace", you should avoid "exchange" as that describes a different mechanic. So you could word it like:

…put it into your hand and set aside a different* card from your hand face up (on this**). If it is…

* If it is your intention that it has to be different.
** When the card is face up, it doesn't make sense to hide it under the Chamber. Better is on it (see Cargo Ship).

Logged

Lackar

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Respect: +17
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #78 on: April 07, 2021, 10:05:31 am »
0

Here is my submission

Feedback welcome
I think it need to say "for the rest of the game".

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold. These are gained to your hand
(This stays in Play)
« Last Edit: April 07, 2021, 02:15:36 pm by Lackar »
Logged

grep

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 297
  • Respect: +449
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #79 on: April 07, 2021, 11:50:18 am »
0

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold to your hand
(This stays in Play)
Is the Silver going to the hand as well? It is not obvious from the text.
Logged

Lackar

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Respect: +17
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #80 on: April 07, 2021, 02:16:10 pm »
0

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold to your hand
(This stays in Play)
Is the Silver going to the hand as well? It is not obvious from the text.

to your hand for both.
Changed the text above.
Logged

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1528
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #81 on: April 07, 2021, 02:31:17 pm »
+1

Malaise
Action/Duration - $3
Gain a card from the Trash.
For the rest of the game, at the start of each of your turns, trash an Action card from the supply. (This stays in play)
This looks like a weird auto-three-pile, Lurker, Feast thingy.
Three-pile is obvious, Lurker because there are positive externalities, Feast because it is a one shot that is cheaper than Feast yet slightly better (except for the first copy that is played).
If it were not for the crazy fast piling this would be an interesting card.
Logged

mandioca15

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
  • Respect: +237
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #82 on: April 07, 2021, 02:39:04 pm »
0

Magnate (Action-Duration, $5)

At the start of each of your turns, if you have no Debt tokens, +2 Cards, +1 Buy and take two Debt tokens.
(This remains in play.)

A perma-Wharf that only functions if you can keep on top of your Debt.
Is it intentional that you only ever want to play one of these? Because it seems in that case it would make more sense as a Project.

Would it work better if it always gave you the draw, buy and Debt tokens, regardless of if you have Debt?
Maybe? I think I like the balance with it only giving draw if you have no Debt, so it's not too bonkers with no-buy engines. But it would be good if they could still be stacked. Not sure there's a good wording for it. A somewhat awkward solution would be

"At the start of each of your turns, if you have no Debt tokens, +2 Cards, +1 Buy and put two Debt tokens on this. At the start of your Buy phase, take the Debt from here."

Thanks for the suggestion! I will amend my entry to the following:

Magnate (Action-Duration, $5)

At the start of each of your turns, if you have no Debt tokens, +2 Cards, +1 Buy and set aside two Debt tokens. At the start of your Buy phase, take all Debt tokens set aside by this.
(This remains in play.)
Logged

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Respect: +1450
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #83 on: April 07, 2021, 03:55:05 pm »
+1

Here is my submission

Feedback welcome
I think it need to say "for the rest of the game".

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold. These are gained to your hand
(This stays in Play)

Very cool idea for a submission. Per your request, here is some feedback, both technical/copy editing and substantive:

The card type (at the bottom) should be "Action - Duration" not just Action.

The phrase "This stays in play" should have a period at the end, inside of the parentheses, and the P in play should be lower case (see Hireling).

In the text ("trash 2 silvers to gain a gold"), the words "silvers" and "gold" should be capitalized. Also, it needs to specify that the 2 Coppers or 2 Silvers are being trashed from your hand (see Mine, Moneylender).

I think the last sentence ("These are gained to your hand") is a bit ambiguous, and the total text would not be longer if you added "to your hand" after both "gain a Silver" and "gain a Gold". If you are going to leave it as is, it needs a period.

Substantively, I think the card might be too powerful. The Copper to Silver swap is a no-brainer, and accomplishes something that's an incredibly important thing to do (getting rid of your Coppers) any cost to any turn. Usually, the turn on which you trash an item is somehow lessened by the trashing. The Silver-to-Gold has some cost, since the value goes from $2 to $3, but given that it is an option every time you have two Silvers in hand for the rest of the game, it's still an incredibly useful tool.

At the very least, I would suggest getting rid of the Vanilla bonuses (+Card/Action/Buy). If you are getting a bonus for the rest of the game, it is not at all unreasonable to make you use a terminal action on one turn to do it. Plus, they're taking up half the cards space and shrinking your text way down (which is going to get even smaller when you add "from your hand" twice).

Hope that was clear/helpful.
Logged
he/him/his

Thanks to Shard of Honor for his Extended Version of the Dominion Card Image Generator, which I use to mock up my fan cards, and to Violet CLM, who made the original.

Lackar

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Respect: +17
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #84 on: April 08, 2021, 09:51:25 am »
0

Here is my submission

Feedback welcome
I think it need to say "for the rest of the game".

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold. These are gained to your hand
(This stays in Play)

Very cool idea for a submission. Per your request, here is some feedback, both technical/copy editing and substantive:

The card type (at the bottom) should be "Action - Duration" not just Action.

The phrase "This stays in play" should have a period at the end, inside of the parentheses, and the P in play should be lower case (see Hireling).

In the text ("trash 2 silvers to gain a gold"), the words "silvers" and "gold" should be capitalized. Also, it needs to specify that the 2 Coppers or 2 Silvers are being trashed from your hand (see Mine, Moneylender).

I think the last sentence ("These are gained to your hand") is a bit ambiguous, and the total text would not be longer if you added "to your hand" after both "gain a Silver" and "gain a Gold". If you are going to leave it as is, it needs a period.

Substantively, I think the card might be too powerful. The Copper to Silver swap is a no-brainer, and accomplishes something that's an incredibly important thing to do (getting rid of your Coppers) any cost to any turn. Usually, the turn on which you trash an item is somehow lessened by the trashing. The Silver-to-Gold has some cost, since the value goes from $2 to $3, but given that it is an option every time you have two Silvers in hand for the rest of the game, it's still an incredibly useful tool.

At the very least, I would suggest getting rid of the Vanilla bonuses (+Card/Action/Buy). If you are getting a bonus for the rest of the game, it is not at all unreasonable to make you use a terminal action on one turn to do it. Plus, they're taking up half the cards space and shrinking your text way down (which is going to get even smaller when you add "from your hand" twice).

Hope that was clear/helpful.

A lot of what you said makes sense and the corrections. Seems what I want to do is going to make too much text on the card. this one kinda does the same purpose
Lets see how this looks



Corrected some spelling
« Last Edit: April 08, 2021, 05:18:12 pm by Lackar »
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #85 on: April 08, 2021, 01:22:26 pm »
+1

New entry, wansnt happy with the earlier entry



A mixture of Prince and captain, with a bit of thinning.

Edit 1:

Wording fixes. (thanks CRLUNDY and S-SMARTS for pointing out loops and such.)


Edit 2: Segura thought it was too strong, so i nerfed collector: now the player to your left chooses what card you play with Collector. You may then trash the card that was played with collector


Edit 3: further nerfs, and increased cost


This is not really related to the card itself, but lately I've been frustrated with my cards for WDC: It feels like they are of bad quality, and that i have trouble getting inspired/make interesting cards, and that people don't think they are interesting. I know this is pretty self-absorbed, but I'm wondering if people think i have some positive influence here? It doesn't have to be big.

I am switching antideppresants, so it may just be mood disturbances from that.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 01:32:50 pm by fika monster »
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5300
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #86 on: April 08, 2021, 02:04:53 pm »
+3

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #87 on: April 08, 2021, 02:41:53 pm »
+1

New entry, wansnt happy with the earlier entry



A mixture of Prince and captain, with a bit of thinning.

Edit 1:

Wording fixes. (thanks CRLUNDY and S-SMARTS for pointing out loops and such.)


Seems like Prince on steroids.  There's no cost limitation to what it can play, it doesn't require to you to line up cards, you're not locked into the same card every time, *plus* you get to actually play the card you're Collecting on the turn you Collect it, *and* it allows you to get all your Coppers out of your deck (EDIT: I didn't notice that your revision changed it to one card in play, that would limit the Copper-thinning significantly).  Also, the way it's written, there doesn't seem to be anything preventing you from playing the same card with multiple Collectors
« Last Edit: April 08, 2021, 02:43:21 pm by mxdata »
Logged
They/them

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #88 on: April 08, 2021, 02:44:29 pm »
0

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1528
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #89 on: April 08, 2021, 02:52:28 pm »
+2

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Well, it surely is not as automatic as Citadel (which is a Princed Throne Room) and wrong in a significant faction of Kingdoms. But it is not weak and I think that it is a far better design than some of those expensive Projects.

On a sidenote, do you also think that Hireling is weak? If you compare your card with Hireling it should become obvious that Collector is far too strong.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2021, 02:54:05 pm by segura »
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #90 on: April 08, 2021, 03:08:47 pm »
0

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Well, it surely is not as automatic as Citadel (which is a Princed Throne Room) and wrong in a significant faction of Kingdoms. But it is not weak and I think that it is a far better design than some of those expensive Projects.

On a sidenote, do you also think that Hireling is weak? If you compare your card with Hireling it should become obvious that Collector is far too strong.

Hmmm. i think hireling is a weak 6, but it would be far to strong as a 5, because then a player that opens 5 would get +1 card for the rest of the game on like turn 4

Ill think about Collectors power level. First thing that comes to mind is adding a Money limit to what can be played
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1528
  • Respect: +1423
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #91 on: April 08, 2021, 03:24:08 pm »
+1

Sure, but then it will still be stronger than Prince. Of course you can Exile too much with too many Collectors in play. But if you manage it wisely, the benefit of Exiling stuff and the flexibility this has relative to Prince dominate the „over-Exiling“ downsides.
So you either gotta make it more expensive than $8, which might be a dubious price range, or nerf it further.
Logged

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +634
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #92 on: April 08, 2021, 04:00:07 pm »
+2

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Well, it surely is not as automatic as Citadel (which is a Princed Throne Room) and wrong in a significant faction of Kingdoms. But it is not weak and I think that it is a far better design than some of those expensive Projects.

On a sidenote, do you also think that Hireling is weak? If you compare your card with Hireling it should become obvious that Collector is far too strong.

Hmmm. i think hireling is a weak 6, but it would be far to strong as a 5, because then a player that opens 5 would get +1 card for the rest of the game on like turn 4

Ill think about Collectors power level. First thing that comes to mind is adding a Money limit to what can be played

Maybe Exile only in the turn that you gain Collector, rather than at each turn? 

Or alternatively, force it to Exile an Action card during Clean-up so that it doesn't have the additional benefit of thinning Coppers. 
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3376
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +5142
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #93 on: April 09, 2021, 03:58:13 am »
+4

Isn't this strictly stronger than Prince?

Yes, but i think prince is way too weak tbh
Well, it surely is not as automatic as Citadel (which is a Princed Throne Room) and wrong in a significant faction of Kingdoms. But it is not weak and I think that it is a far better design than some of those expensive Projects.

On a sidenote, do you also think that Hireling is weak? If you compare your card with Hireling it should become obvious that Collector is far too strong.
It's worth noting that Citadel is significantly weaker than Princed Throne Room because you usually don't want to use it on terminals. The fact that you are more or less forced to Throne a cantrip when playing Citadel is a major downside (it's still pretty strong though). A Princed Throne Room is Citadel+Barracks.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 03:59:47 am by faust »
Logged
You say the ocean's rising, like I give a shit
You say the whole world's ending, honey it already did

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #94 on: April 09, 2021, 05:09:02 am »
0

Here is my submission

Feedback welcome
I think it need to say "for the rest of the game".

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold. These are gained to your hand
(This stays in Play)

Very cool idea for a submission. Per your request, here is some feedback, both technical/copy editing and substantive:

The card type (at the bottom) should be "Action - Duration" not just Action.

The phrase "This stays in play" should have a period at the end, inside of the parentheses, and the P in play should be lower case (see Hireling).

In the text ("trash 2 silvers to gain a gold"), the words "silvers" and "gold" should be capitalized. Also, it needs to specify that the 2 Coppers or 2 Silvers are being trashed from your hand (see Mine, Moneylender).

I think the last sentence ("These are gained to your hand") is a bit ambiguous, and the total text would not be longer if you added "to your hand" after both "gain a Silver" and "gain a Gold". If you are going to leave it as is, it needs a period.

Substantively, I think the card might be too powerful. The Copper to Silver swap is a no-brainer, and accomplishes something that's an incredibly important thing to do (getting rid of your Coppers) any cost to any turn. Usually, the turn on which you trash an item is somehow lessened by the trashing. The Silver-to-Gold has some cost, since the value goes from $2 to $3, but given that it is an option every time you have two Silvers in hand for the rest of the game, it's still an incredibly useful tool.

At the very least, I would suggest getting rid of the Vanilla bonuses (+Card/Action/Buy). If you are getting a bonus for the rest of the game, it is not at all unreasonable to make you use a terminal action on one turn to do it. Plus, they're taking up half the cards space and shrinking your text way down (which is going to get even smaller when you add "from your hand" twice).

Hope that was clear/helpful.

A lot of what you said makes sense and the corrections. Seems what I want to do is going to make too much text on the card. this one kinda does the same purpose
Lets see how this looks



Corrected some spelling

Just the first letter in Copper, Silver, and Gold should be capitalized, not the whole word

Also, is it intentional that this new version does not gain to hand?
Logged
They/them

Holger

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 736
  • Respect: +458
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #95 on: April 09, 2021, 05:47:14 am »
+1

New entry, wansnt happy with the earlier entry



A mixture of Prince and captain, with a bit of thinning.

Edit 1:

Wording fixes. (thanks CRLUNDY and S-SMARTS for pointing out loops and such.)


Edit 2: Segura thought it was too strong, so i nerfed collector: now the player to your left chooses what card you play with Collector. You may then trash the card that was played with collector


This version is still strictly better than Prince by a lot (at least the first copy), unless some other card forces you to Exile cards: You can just keep a single card in Exile, giving the other player no choice. Even without the extra trashing option, this should cost more than Prince.
Logged

silverspawn

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5300
  • Shuffle iT Username: sty.silver
  • Respect: +3188
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #96 on: April 09, 2021, 06:51:43 am »
+1

It's too strong, but forcing your opponent to choose the card makes it more interesting. Now it's not just a stronger Prince.

I think the obvious fix is to make your opponent choose what to Exile as well.

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 216
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #97 on: April 09, 2021, 07:38:04 am »
+3

I've been trying not to chime in much here, since I'm judging (other than to comment when an entry is not valid). But I think I'll add a couple comments.

I like that the community gives feedback on submissions (and I do it too when I'm not judging). Wording changes, either making it more elegant/simple or making it similar to existing standards is very helpful.

And raising an issue with balance, looping, or even cost (specifically when it's strictly greater or worse than an existing card) - those are great for fine-tuning a design. But the constant back-and-forth, telling someone to change just about every part of their card... I feel like now I'll be judging a community submission, not that person's design (also, all those comments clutter up the submissions part of the thread).

 I think it's okay to let the judging address some card issues. Posting ways to improve a card can be done after a contest is complete.

That being said, I will still provide a couple comments/questions about 1 or 2 submissions...

It's too strong, but forcing your opponent to choose the card makes it more interesting. Now it's not just a stronger Prince.

I think the obvious fix is to make your opponent choose what to Exile as well.

I think it's up to the original card designer whether the person playing it or the person to left chooses what to exile, but either could work, depending on the card cost.

Also, I think the card itself still needs some clarity... is the exile happening only on the turn the card is played (then put that paragraph first) or on every turn (then state "at the start of every clean up phase" for it)? Again, I think either could work, depending on cost... but also, this choice may help decide who chooses what to exile.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 07:40:02 am by mathdude »
Logged
he/him

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +495
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #98 on: April 09, 2021, 09:16:21 am »
0

I feel like now I'll be judging a community submission, not that person's design (also, all those comments clutter up the submissions part of the thread).

Although I agree with what you wrote, there is an issue with that anyway. People get totally different levels of help. Some present cards from scratch, some recycle some old ideas, having some feedback already on older versions, and some get a lot of help outside this thread anyway.

I think, we have to live with the fact that users have unequal chances to present a good or excellent card or even win the contest. If the priorities are to produce good cards, improve our design skills, communicate and discuss, and have fun, then everything should be okay; in my opinion at least.
Logged

Lackar

  • Alchemist
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 36
  • Respect: +17
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #110: This stays in play
« Reply #99 on: April 09, 2021, 09:42:55 am »
0

Here is my submission

Feedback welcome
I think it need to say "for the rest of the game".

Updated original entry now does
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
At the start of each of your turns for the rest of the game, you may trash 2 Coppers to gain a Silver or trash 2 silvers to gain a gold. These are gained to your hand
(This stays in Play)

Very cool idea for a submission. Per your request, here is some feedback, both technical/copy editing and substantive:

The card type (at the bottom) should be "Action - Duration" not just Action.

The phrase "This stays in play" should have a period at the end, inside of the parentheses, and the P in play should be lower case (see Hireling).

In the text ("trash 2 silvers to gain a gold"), the words "silvers" and "gold" should be capitalized. Also, it needs to specify that the 2 Coppers or 2 Silvers are being trashed from your hand (see Mine, Moneylender).

I think the last sentence ("These are gained to your hand") is a bit ambiguous, and the total text would not be longer if you added "to your hand" after both "gain a Silver" and "gain a Gold". If you are going to leave it as is, it needs a period.

Substantively, I think the card might be too powerful. The Copper to Silver swap is a no-brainer, and accomplishes something that's an incredibly important thing to do (getting rid of your Coppers) any cost to any turn. Usually, the turn on which you trash an item is somehow lessened by the trashing. The Silver-to-Gold has some cost, since the value goes from $2 to $3, but given that it is an option every time you have two Silvers in hand for the rest of the game, it's still an incredibly useful tool.

At the very least, I would suggest getting rid of the Vanilla bonuses (+Card/Action/Buy). If you are getting a bonus for the rest of the game, it is not at all unreasonable to make you use a terminal action on one turn to do it. Plus, they're taking up half the cards space and shrinking your text way down (which is going to get even smaller when you add "from your hand" twice).

Hope that was clear/helpful.

A lot of what you said makes sense and the corrections. Seems what I want to do is going to make too much text on the card. this one kinda does the same purpose
Lets see how this looks



Corrected some spelling

Just the first letter in Copper, Silver, and Gold should be capitalized, not the whole word

Also, is it intentional that this new version does not gain to hand?

Yes as it made the text too long as I had to add it to both Silvers and Gold. It still feels too wordy as it is now.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  All
 

Page created in 0.071 seconds with 21 queries.