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 #115: Don't Count On It  (Read 10395 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +494
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #50 on: May 19, 2021, 12:39:34 pm »
0


My Submission:

   
Overlook
$4 – Action - Duration
Quote

     Either now or at the start     
 of your next turn: Look
 through your discard pile.
 You may play an Action
 card from it.


“All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” - Proverb

It's a verry cool reference ^^
Since it's a sort of super-cantrip, maybe it should cost $3 no?
$4 seem a litle bit expensive for this effect, especialy if you compare it to Throne Room (witch also "copy" an action card).

I agree that this is a $3. Sure, later in the game it is better than Sage but unlike Sage, you cannot open with this to sift and cycle.

I've spent (and still do) way more time on thinking about the cost of the card than about its ability. What "scared" me was the ability to relatively often play a powerful terminal drawer at the start of the next turn, like Smithy or Witch (which could have been gained just in the current turn). Aside of games where the whole deck is drawn, Overlook should be quite reliable to pick a good card from the discard. It has of course the drawback of being a Duration if the ability is used for the next turn. On the other hand, I don't see a big difference of (strong) $3 and (weak) $4 cost cards and I guess that Overlook would be frequently bought at $4 anyway.

Are you still convinced that $3 is the better cost?
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +494
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #51 on: May 19, 2021, 12:49:00 pm »
0

If that was the case I'd need to allow victory cards, I think.  It feels really weak if you have to choose between gaining horses or playing your expensive card.

It wouldn't be terrible, IMO.  As-is, Farrier could be pretty weak early in the game if you only have Coppers and Estates in hand.  You would open up the possibility of it gaining a bunch of Horses with Provinces or Colonies, but is it that much worse than being able to reveal a Gold or a Platinum?

I like your idea of discarding cards for gaining Horses and including Victory cards sounds like a bad idea to me, which makes it less interesting. As far as I see it, the main targets would be Silvers and Horses, and occasionally higher cost Action cards when there is no +Action left. Your suggestions would keep most craziness at bay. It somehow reminds me of Scrap. I like it.
Logged

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1152
  • Respect: +1017
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On i
« Reply #52 on: May 19, 2021, 01:48:06 pm »
+1


My Submission:

   
Overlook
$4 – Action - Duration
Quote

     Either now or at the start     
 of your next turn: Look
 through your discard pile.
 You may play an Action
 card from it.


“All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” - Proverb

It's a verry cool reference ^^
Since it's a sort of super-cantrip, maybe it should cost $3 no?
$4 seem a litle bit expensive for this effect, especialy if you compare it to Throne Room (witch also "copy" an action card).

I agree that this is a $3. Sure, later in the game it is better than Sage but unlike Sage, you cannot open with this to sift and cycle.

I've spent (and still do) way more time on thinking about the cost of the card than about its ability. What "scared" me was the ability to relatively often play a powerful terminal drawer at the start of the next turn, like Smithy or Witch (which could have been gained just in the current turn). Aside of games where the whole deck is drawn, Overlook should be quite reliable to pick a good card from the discard. It has of course the drawback of being a Duration if the ability is used for the next turn. On the other hand, I don't see a big difference of (strong) $3 and (weak) $4 cost cards and I guess that Overlook would be frequently bought at $4 anyway.

Are you still convinced that $3 is the better cost?
I don’t think that this scenario is very scary. Cargo Ship does the same with 2 Coins instead of an implicit Action.

Also, there is frequently no discard pile (or if there is one, there is often more junk in it due to junking and sifting). When I first saw Settlers I thought that this absolutely has to be a $3. Then I played some games and realized how often there is no discard pile when you play Settlers.
Then there is Harbinger, definitely an overpriced card that also looked decent the first time you saw it and sucked when you first used it (in Kingdoms without Vassal).

Sure, you neatly hedged against that risk via making it a Duration but Durations have their own weaknesses.

At the end of the day, the delta between $3 and $4 is fairly irrelevant. You buy that Mining Village for $4 even if you never blow it up. But a cantrip that digs for an Action in the discard pile seems to me to be a clear $3. It is nice but doesn’t do any essential work like splitting, drawing or sifting. Sure, it increases consistency to some degree but Scheme is probably easier to use in this respect.
Logged

X-tra

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 415
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +936
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #53 on: May 19, 2021, 02:36:36 pm »
+1

Do not count this entry, it does not match this contest's criteria



Started pretty simple, then realized it needed some fluff. "Non-Duration", "On their turn", etc.

Still. Go on. Play your Militia. Do it. I'm eagerly waiting  :) . Something as naïve as playing a Village is helpful. Gives you a hand of 6 cards. Then trashing a card from your hand on your next turn becomes even more appealing. Imagine your opponent playing a King's Court first on their turn, lol. Their turn? Your turn now.
« Last Edit: May 21, 2021, 05:23:34 pm by X-tra »
Logged
Bottom text

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +494
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On i
« Reply #54 on: May 19, 2021, 02:54:16 pm »
+1


My Submission:

   
Overlook
$4 – Action - Duration
Quote

     Either now or at the start     
 of your next turn: Look
 through your discard pile.
 You may play an Action
 card from it.


“All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.” - Proverb

It's a verry cool reference ^^
Since it's a sort of super-cantrip, maybe it should cost $3 no?
$4 seem a litle bit expensive for this effect, especialy if you compare it to Throne Room (witch also "copy" an action card).

I agree that this is a $3. Sure, later in the game it is better than Sage but unlike Sage, you cannot open with this to sift and cycle.

I've spent (and still do) way more time on thinking about the cost of the card than about its ability. What "scared" me was the ability to relatively often play a powerful terminal drawer at the start of the next turn, like Smithy or Witch (which could have been gained just in the current turn). Aside of games where the whole deck is drawn, Overlook should be quite reliable to pick a good card from the discard. It has of course the drawback of being a Duration if the ability is used for the next turn. On the other hand, I don't see a big difference of (strong) $3 and (weak) $4 cost cards and I guess that Overlook would be frequently bought at $4 anyway.

Are you still convinced that $3 is the better cost?
I don’t think that this scenario is very scary. Cargo Ship does the same with 2 Coins instead of an implicit Action.

Also, there is frequently no discard pile (or if there is one, there is often more junk in it due to junking and sifting). When I first saw Settlers I thought that this absolutely has to be a $3. Then I played some games and realized how often there is no discard pile when you play Settlers.
Then there is Harbinger, definitely an overpriced card that also looked decent the first time you saw it and sucked when you first used it (in Kingdoms without Vassal).

Sure, you neatly hedged against that risk via making it a Duration but Durations have their own weaknesses.

At the end of the day, the delta between $3 and $4 is fairly irrelevant. You buy that Mining Village for $4 even if you never blow it up. But a cantrip that digs for an Action in the discard pile seems to me to be a clear $3. It is nice but doesn’t do any essential work like splitting, drawing or sifting. Sure, it increases consistency to some degree but Scheme is probably easier to use in this respect.

Thank you for the thorough analysis of Overlook. I am really impressed and I'll change its cost to $3.
 
Logged

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +494
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #55 on: May 19, 2021, 03:11:56 pm »
0



Started pretty simple, then realized it needed some fluff. "Non-Duration", "On their turn", etc.

Still. Go on. Play your Militia. Do it. I'm eagerly waiting  :) . Something as naïve as playing a Village is helpful. Gives you a hand of 6 cards. Then trashing a card from your hand on your next turn becomes even more appealing. Imagine your opponent playing a King's Court first on their turn, lol. Their turn? Your turn now.

I think this is too crazy. I presented Scriptorium in the last round of this contest and although it got a honorable mention, both LastFootnote (the current judge) and 4est (judge of that contest) suggested a simpler version, and at least in the case of 4est, it was because to avoid crazy situations (LastFootnote didn't specify his reason). My wild guess is that Scriptorium causes such crazy situations in less than 10% of the cases. Your Preacher is basically prone to such situations almost every time, or alternatively, causes the game to stall. This could be maybe rescued in some way, but the combination with optional trashing seems to be way too much.
Logged

X-tra

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 415
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +936
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #56 on: May 19, 2021, 03:17:26 pm »
0

I think this is too crazy. I presented Scriptorium in the last round of this contest and although it got a honorable mention, both LastFootnote (the current judge) and 4est (judge of that contest) suggested a simpler version, and at least in the case of 4est, it was because to avoid crazy situations (LastFootnote didn't specify his reason). My wild guess is that Scriptorium causes such crazy situations in less than 10% of the cases. Your Preacher is basically prone to such situations almost every time, or alternatively, causes the game to stall. This could be maybe rescued in some way, but the combination with optional trashing seems to be way too much.

Difference being, it only ever works on one card. No matter how many Preachers you have played in one turn. They'll all Preach for one card. In most case, actually, this is fine and easily resolvable. However, there is the King's Court case and well. If King's Court's got some form of "counter", uh, it won't make me sympathetic for it.  :D
Logged
Bottom text

gambit05

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 584
  • Respect: +494
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #57 on: May 19, 2021, 03:29:06 pm »
0

I think this is too crazy. I presented Scriptorium in the last round of this contest and although it got a honorable mention, both LastFootnote (the current judge) and 4est (judge of that contest) suggested a simpler version, and at least in the case of 4est, it was because to avoid crazy situations (LastFootnote didn't specify his reason). My wild guess is that Scriptorium causes such crazy situations in less than 10% of the cases. Your Preacher is basically prone to such situations almost every time, or alternatively, causes the game to stall. This could be maybe rescued in some way, but the combination with optional trashing seems to be way too much.

Difference being, it only ever works on one card. No matter how many Preachers you have played in one turn. They'll all Preach for one card. In most case, actually, this is fine and easily resolvable. However, there is the King's Court case and well. If King's Court's got some form of "counter", uh, it won't make me sympathetic for it.  :D

Okay, but why do you combine this with a double-optional trashing?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7467
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +10648
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #58 on: May 19, 2021, 03:31:06 pm »
+3

Sorry X-tra, but your card says “first” on it.
Logged

X-tra

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 415
  • Text under avatar
  • Respect: +936
    • View Profile
    • a
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #59 on: May 19, 2021, 03:41:27 pm »
0

Okay, but why do you combine this with a double-optional trashing?

Well, I felt like it was a pretty unique feat to do that. Closest card that mimics that kind of idea is Amulet (only one turn though). But it does other stuff too, and it costs .

I also needed something to happen next turn with Preacher, to justify the "Until then", and well, why not double trash? It's concise and easy to remember. Trash first, something might happen, then trash. It starts with a trash and end with one (well, if you want to), so it's pretty elegant at that.


Sorry X-tra, but your card says “first” on it.

Oh, right right. Forgot about that. Funnily enough, it says "first" twice. I don't think this is patchable, because it really does need to point toward one and only once card played to not go out of hand. The second "first" can be removed (ex: "you may do its effects after."), but the the first "first" (lol) is a tough nut to crack indeed.
Logged
Bottom text

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #60 on: May 19, 2021, 04:45:24 pm »
0

Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. But I think I prefer it not to be an attack, even for that case. Not exactly the same (since you also have to gain the Copper), but Messenger is not an attack and can give out coppers.

I think this needs to be an Attack. Messenger is not an attack because (usually) its given to all players including yourself. Meanwhile with this, on a board with no $2's for example, this is basically an ambassador in its junking and a silver gainer for you.
Logged

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #61 on: May 19, 2021, 04:47:21 pm »
0

ok, I think I have my submition for these contest:



Yes, i've already post a version of this for an other contest (this stay in play) but I've rewok it a litle bit since it was consider too strong and it's a card that I like. My other ideas for this contest seem worth or not as elegant than this so here we go...

Courtyard of Miracle assure you +$1 each turn in exchange of junking your deck. In general, having 3 of these is a garanteed Province each turn (hand full of Copper +3 other with the Courtyards) but between handsize attack, Copper/Treasure synergy or just alt-vp it's usualy not that simple and I think it can lead to different strategy.
Hope you'll like it.

Minor correction: its "gain to your hand".
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1086
  • Respect: +1214
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #62 on: May 19, 2021, 04:57:56 pm »
+1

Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. But I think I prefer it not to be an attack, even for that case. Not exactly the same (since you also have to gain the Copper), but Messenger is not an attack and can give out coppers.

I think this needs to be an Attack. Messenger is not an attack because (usually) its given to all players including yourself. Meanwhile with this, on a board with no $2's for example, this is basically an ambassador in its junking and a silver gainer for you.

Alternately, you could add a "may" to the other players' gaining
Logged
They/them

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1086
  • Respect: +1214
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #63 on: May 19, 2021, 08:21:18 pm »
+6


Quote
Recycle
Night - Reaction
$5
Trash a card you have in play to gain a cheaper card onto your deck.
-
When you gain a card, you may reveal this to trash that card and gain a card costing less than it.

Lets you get one last use out of a card before trashing it, and then gives you a cheaper card, which you can use on your next turn. It has obvious synergies with cards that have on-trash abilities.  You can, for example, get a free $3 card out of a Fortress.  Near the end of the game, you can also cannibalize Golds into Duchies, or Hunting Grounds into two Duchies (or a Duchy + some other $5 card), although those Duchies will go straight onto your deck.  You could also use it to trash Coppers, and receive nothing, but it's not exactly the most efficient Copper-trasher.  You can't trash curses or Estates with it, though

The reaction's usefulness is heavily contingent on the rest of the kingdom. It would synergize *very* well with Fortress, especially with Workshop variants, as you'd simultaneously receive a Fortress to hand and another $3 card. Rats would also work great with it, since you can trash the gained Rats with the reaction, and then trash the played Rats with the Night phase ability. And cards with on-gain bonuses, such as Flag Bearer, would be useful with this too. Get the flag and a $3-cost card for $4.  With cards like Soothsayer that allow you to gain a Gold, you can use them now to gain Duchies. And, of course, it can trash incoming $0-cost junk like a Watchtower
Logged
They/them

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #64 on: May 20, 2021, 12:24:31 am »
+6



Simple card to send to exile any greens you don't want clogging your deck, but don't worry, any actions or treasures that might have gone along for the ride can be shipped back at a later date.
Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3209
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #65 on: May 20, 2021, 01:11:12 am »
+2

Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. But I think I prefer it not to be an attack, even for that case. Not exactly the same (since you also have to gain the Copper), but Messenger is not an attack and can give out coppers.

I think this needs to be an Attack. Messenger is not an attack because (usually) its given to all players including yourself. Meanwhile with this, on a board with no $2's for example, this is basically an ambassador in its junking and a silver gainer for you.
The reason that Messenger is not an Attack is that it doesn't affect other players on play, not that it gives stuff to everyone.
Logged
The quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

spheremonk

  • Thief
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
  • Respect: +185
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #66 on: May 20, 2021, 02:58:20 am »
+2

THIS IS NOT AN ENTRY, BUT I'D LOVE TO ARGUE ABOUT WHETHER IT QUALIFIES.

Logged

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3209
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #67 on: May 20, 2021, 03:55:45 am »
+2

THIS IS NOT AN ENTRY, BUT I'D LOVE TO ARGUE ABOUT WHETHER IT QUALIFIES.



Given this statement in the OP:
Enough with all this mathematical nonsense!
I would assume it's not quite in the spirit of the contest  ;)

I think the idea is that in a way, you are not referring to numbers explicitly because there is no formula relating the number of Villagers to the number of Debt you take. I would argue that it doesn't really work since there is a closed-form expression of the Fibonacci numbers, so your entry is equivalent to writing

"Pick any number n. Take Villagers and Debt, where is the Golden Ratio."

It would be different if you used prime numbers. But of course you'd have to pause the game a couple of years until someone builds a better supercomputer if one of you decides to name the largest known prime number.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2021, 04:25:57 am by faust »
Logged
The quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +211
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #68 on: May 20, 2021, 04:55:07 am »
+4

THIS IS NOT AN ENTRY, BUT I'D LOVE TO ARGUE ABOUT WHETHER IT QUALIFIES.



I declare foul! There are numbers in the picture! The picture is fundamental to the identity of a card I say!
Logged

scolapasta

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 561
  • Respect: +715
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #69 on: May 20, 2021, 11:58:19 am »
0

Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. But I think I prefer it not to be an attack, even for that case. Not exactly the same (since you also have to gain the Copper), but Messenger is not an attack and can give out coppers.

I think this needs to be an Attack. Messenger is not an attack because (usually) its given to all players including yourself. Meanwhile with this, on a board with no $2's for example, this is basically an ambassador in its junking and a silver gainer for you.
The reason that Messenger is not an Attack is that it doesn't affect other players on play, not that it gives stuff to everyone.

The problem with making Border Crossing an attack card is that actually makes it stronger, since other players would need to react before knowing what card the player gained. So for example in a two player game, if I play Border Crossing and you react with a Moat, I can just gain a Gold (or better) and you don't gain anything to balance.

mxdata suggested adding "may" but that takes away the ability to gain a $2 and force the Copper gaining, which I liked. And I think if you are doing this regularly, then you're not really doing much as you may be giving your opponents Coppers, but not getting much yourself out of it. This does become, as The Alchemist pointed out, a bigger issue if there are no $2s, but in those cases, I'd think that means there are probably a lot of good $5s ands that could still be a better move than gaining a Silver to give your opponent(s) a Copper.

I'd be curious to playtest this and see how it would go with Player 1 trying to junk the Player 2, while Player 2 used it to gain strong $5s (and allow Player $1 to get $4s).

Also I just noticed a bonus to it's cost of $4 is that if you do use it to get a $5, the other player can then gain their own Border Crossing.
Logged
Feel free to join us at scolapasta's cards for discussion on any of my custom cards.

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3209
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +4743
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #70 on: May 20, 2021, 12:10:11 pm »
+3

Hmm. I hadn't thought about that. But I think I prefer it not to be an attack, even for that case. Not exactly the same (since you also have to gain the Copper), but Messenger is not an attack and can give out coppers.

I think this needs to be an Attack. Messenger is not an attack because (usually) its given to all players including yourself. Meanwhile with this, on a board with no $2's for example, this is basically an ambassador in its junking and a silver gainer for you.
The reason that Messenger is not an Attack is that it doesn't affect other players on play, not that it gives stuff to everyone.

The problem with making Border Crossing an attack card is that actually makes it stronger, since other players would need to react before knowing what card the player gained. So for example in a two player game, if I play Border Crossing and you react with a Moat, I can just gain a Gold (or better) and you don't gain anything to balance.
This example is bad; if unmoatable Border Crossing was worse, then your opponents could just always choose to not reveal Moat, and have that experience.

It is a real problem with blocking that is non-voluntary however, i.e. Lighthouse and Guardian. These would really be weird with Attack-Border Crossing.
Logged
The quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

mathdude

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 214
  • Respect: +226
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #71 on: May 20, 2021, 03:41:12 pm »
+4

Here's a gainer that can get you $5 cards, either into your hand or onto your deck, depending on when you play it.
Logged
he/him

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +628
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #72 on: May 20, 2021, 05:42:49 pm »
+1

I bounced a few ideas off the folks on Discord.  There were many directions I could have gone with this, but decided on this version for this week's contest:



Metamorphose will allow you to exchange cards you have in play at the start of Clean-up (including Treasures and Night cards) for other cards with the same cost. 

Metamorphose could be useful if there are cursers or junkers that you want to swap out of your deck once the Curse or Ruins pile runs out, or if you have trashers that have overstayed their welcome.  Or perhaps you wanted those Lackeys or Skulks for their on-gain bonus and would now prefer something else in your deck instead.  This could be attractive with Magpies or Rats if there are other useful $4-cost cards in the Kingdom that you would rather have.  You could even swap out your Coppers for Curses, if that's what floats your boat.  There is a non-Victory card limitation, so if you were hoping to trade in all your Labs for Duchies on your final turn, you're out of luck.

Being able to exchange a Treasure for another non-Victory card would create a strong combo with Capital, but I think there's room for another crazy Capital combo. 
« Last Edit: May 20, 2021, 05:45:53 pm by Timinou »
Logged

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 670
  • Respect: +1179
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #73 on: May 20, 2021, 06:02:34 pm »
+2

I bounced a few ideas off the folks on Discord.  There were many directions I could have gone with this, but decided on this version for this week's contest:



Metamorphose will allow you to exchange cards you have in play at the start of Clean-up (including Treasures and Night cards) for other cards with the same cost. 

Metamorphose could be useful if there are cursers or junkers that you want to swap out of your deck once the Curse or Ruins pile runs out, or if you have trashers that have overstayed their welcome.  Or perhaps you wanted those Lackeys or Skulks for their on-gain bonus and would now prefer something else in your deck instead.  This could be attractive with Magpies or Rats if there are other useful $4-cost cards in the Kingdom that you would rather have.  You could even swap out your Coppers for Curses, if that's what floats your boat.  There is a non-Victory card limitation, so if you were hoping to trade in all your Labs for Duchies on your final turn, you're out of luck.

Being able to exchange a Treasure for another non-Victory card would create a strong combo with Capital, but I think there's room for another crazy Capital combo.

This Event really likes Highway. Drop 3 of them and you can turn your Coppers into Silvers (and mix in a Workshop to start gaining discounted cards). It also lets you get your hands on a Lost City or Cursed Village without the on-gain penalty (this would be especially attractive if you could use a $5 with +Buy, like Market or Contraband, for the swap).
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.

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1086
  • Respect: +1214
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #115: Don't Count On It
« Reply #74 on: May 20, 2021, 06:25:51 pm »
0

Here's a gainer that can get you $5 cards, either into your hand or onto your deck, depending on when you play it.


Seems like you'd rarely want to play it at night, if you can avoid it, since the earlier it's played, the more options you have.  By the time you get to your Night phase, there's a good chance that you'll have already played any cards you'd want to gain with it, at least after the first few plays of this.  On the other hand, if you can play it early in your Action phase, it becomes basically a stronger Artisan.  This would work great with things like Way of the Turtle or Scheme
Logged
They/them
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  All
 

Page created in 0.095 seconds with 22 queries.