Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier  (Read 5227 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Respect: +1093
    • View Profile
Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« on: June 04, 2021, 01:55:20 pm »
+1

For Week 12, I am introducing a new card type that I have experiment with a bit, Suppliers. Suppliers are cards that, once gained and played, offer the player one or more additional options during their Buy phase. Generally, Suppliers will come in a 10 card Kingdom piles in the Supply like any other Kingdom card.

How they work:
  • Suppliers are played during your Buy phase. Unlike Treasures, they may be played at any point during your Buy phase, even after you buy something.
  • Every Supplier card has at least one purchase option available. A purchase option is indicate by a price (in coins, debt, etc.), followed by a colon, followed by the effect the purchase generates.
  • While the effect of a purchase will often be to gain a card, that is not a required.
  • Buying a purchase from a Supplier you have played works exactly the same as buying a card, Event, or Project. The player spends the price and 1 Buy and then resolves the effect on the card's text.
  • The price of a purchase can use pricing mechanics like costs less (e.g. Peddler) or overpay (e.g. Doctor).
  • Once a player plays a Supplier, they may buy the purchase(s) as many times as that player has the Buys and resources to afford to do (subject to text on the card limiting such buying).
  • In other words, playing a Supplier card is like adding a new Event (or multiple Events, if it has more than one purchase option) to the game, but one that is only available to the player who played the card, and only that turn.
  • Buying the purchases isn't part of resolving the card (as, for example, paying your coins to Storyteller to draw cards is). But you can put restrictions on when/how the player can make the purchase, similar to Events that say "once per turn" or "once per game" (although the latter is not recommended for Suppliers).
  • Suppliers may have some additional effect when they are played, which can including giving vanilla bonuses.
  • Supplier cards can have other types (e.g. Treasure, Action, Reaction, Duration, Victory) as well.

As with Events, the possibilities are fairly extensive. However, an important design factor is that Supplier cards have some strong built-in disadvantages. The most obvious analogy is an Event, but Suppliers are weaker than Events in three important ways.
  • First, unlike Events, which are automatically available to players, in order to get a Supplier one has to gain a copy of it, spending a Buy and its cost.
  • Second, because a Supplier is a card in your hand that displaces some other card, you will generally be buying the purchase from a point of disadvantage (although this can be mitigated via vanilla bonuses).
  • Third, while an Event is available every Buy phase, even once you have gained a Supplier card, it can only be used on turns during which you draw it. This means you not only have to gain the Supplier and forego a card in your hand, but you need to collide getting that card with the amount of the purchase. Contrast this with, for example, Ride; spending $2 and a Buy for a Horse is not necessarily the best value prospect, but when you end up with $2--especially when there are no $2 Kingdom cards--it is preferable to gain a Horse than nothing.
Therefore, the price point of any Event will almost always be much too high to be the price of a purchase for a Supplier with the same effect. This doesn't mean that Suppliers are inherently bad cards, but the value proposition of what you get for what you spend should reflect these factors.

Here are a few examples:

               
(I have designed several more, but I don't want to crowd out too many ideas; and yes, I stole the official art for Summoner)

The call of the contest is pretty straightforward. Design at least one card that has the Supplier type. The card(s) may have other types as well, and you can design non-Supplier cards (or card-shaped objects, including Artifacts or States) to support the design. You can use other mechanics, either official or fan-created. If you would like to generate a card image, the Custom Color is R:1.0 G:1.0 B:0.76, or you can use this template in Shard of Honor's New Fork of the Violet CLM's Card Image Generator.

The main judging criteria is, as always, would I be excited to see in a Kingdom? Important factors for me are:
  • balance -- is the card useful, but not overpowering (both in general and in a variety of Kingdoms)
  • playability -- the card is fun to play and works in more than one type of deck
  • simplicity -- this doesn't always mean fewer words; a card with lots of text that, once you understand it, can be easily and intuitively be played is better than one with four lines of text that is hard to understand;
  • topicality -- I am keeping things very open-ended in terms of what is allowed, but the focus of your design should be the Supplier card(s); also, the main purpose of the Supplier type is the purchase; if your card's primary use is the on-play bonus, it has missed the point.

The deadline for submissions will be 18:00 UTC / 2:00 p.m. Eastern/Forum time on Friday, June 11, 2021. I hope you enjoy designing these. Please let me know if you have any questions.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2021, 07:19:02 pm by emtzalex »
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.

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #1 on: June 04, 2021, 02:46:44 pm »
+1

I think the border color is too similar to Treasures. Especially since on the client the color is made lighter, it makes it almost indistinguishable. I think I new color would be best.
Logged

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Respect: +1093
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #2 on: June 04, 2021, 03:18:21 pm »
0

I think the border color is too similar to Treasures. Especially since on the client the color is made lighter, it makes it almost indistinguishable. I think I new color would be best.

There are not a ton of color choices that are unused, so the choices are limited. I wanted a pale yellow, but if you go too much lighter it starts to look like an Action card. Also, given that these are (usually) played at the same time as Treasure cards, I'm not sure that it is super important that they are visually distinguishable from the existing cards.

That being said, if someone wants to suggest a different color, I am open to it.
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.

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #3 on: June 04, 2021, 03:56:56 pm »
+3

I think its exactly because they are so similar to Treasure cards that they need to be visually distinct. Alternatively, since they are cards that can be played in the Buy phase, why not make them dual-type? I can see the normal Treasure color working, but with "Treasure-Supplier" in the footer, similar to how "Action-Attacks" are still just the default Action white. The Treasure type gives it the ability to be played in the Buy phase, and the Supplier type gives it the ability to be played after buying a card. I think this would be the best workaround.
Logged

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Respect: +1093
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #4 on: June 04, 2021, 04:25:54 pm »
+1

I think its exactly because they are so similar to Treasure cards that they need to be visually distinct. Alternatively, since they are cards that can be played in the Buy phase, why not make them dual-type? I can see the normal Treasure color working, but with "Treasure-Supplier" in the footer, similar to how "Action-Attacks" are still just the default Action white. The Treasure type gives it the ability to be played in the Buy phase, and the Supplier type gives it the ability to be played after buying a card. I think this would be the best workaround.

My concern with making these a subtype of Treasures is that there are already numerous cards that interact with Treasures in a way that doesn't make sense in the context of Suppliers, especially thematically. How do you Counterfeit a Miner? How do you duplicate a Ranch with a Mint? Cards also operate with the presumption that Treasures will generally be giving you something useful for a Buy; Suppliers generally won't (so something like Venture plays differently, and can get messed up by them).
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.

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +628
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #5 on: June 04, 2021, 04:35:58 pm »
0

I agree with the suggestion of making these dual-type cards, unless there is a compelling reason to have an entirely separate card type.  It could allow for some cool (or unintended) interactions with Storyteller, Black Market, Crown, etc.

I'm also curious about the reasoning behind this:
Quote
Once a player plays a Supplier, they may buy the purchase(s) as many times as that player has the Buys and resources to afford to do (subject to text on the card limiting such buying).

Unless you're playing a slog, it doesn't really provide much incentive for having more than one copy of a Supplier in your deck.  It also raises the question of why the card should be a Supplier rather than an Event.  The obvious difference is that your Supplier is not guaranteed to be available to you during every buy phase, so perhaps that needs to be taken into consideration when designing a Supplier.

For example, I don't think Ranch really adds much over Ride to justify having an entirely new card type. 

You already mentioned that the value proposition of Suppliers needs to be much better relative to an Event, given that Suppliers could really end up being a junk card in your deck. Of the examples you posted, Miners and Ranch look quite weak. 
« Last Edit: June 04, 2021, 04:43:19 pm by Timinou »
Logged

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #6 on: June 04, 2021, 04:44:14 pm »
0

My concern with making these a subtype of Treasures is that there are already numerous cards that interact with Treasures in a way that doesn't make sense in the context of Suppliers, especially thematically. How do you Counterfeit a Miner? How do you duplicate a Ranch with a Mint? Cards also operate with the presumption that Treasures will generally be giving you something useful for a Buy; Suppliers generally won't (so something like Venture plays differently, and can get messed up by them).

I don't see a concern with any of the examples you just listed. We have the do-nothing rule, so it just means most of the time nothing happens. But sometimes they do, for example with the ones that provide coin (and in fact, I believe every Supplier card should give some resource, otherwise I'm not going to waste a card slot in my deck for a card that just gives me more options of stuff to buy. I already have 10 options in the kingdom.) Your ventures example even shows this. If you don't want the supplier card enough that drawing it with ventures is considered a "mess up", then clearly you don't want it enough to have it in your deck at all.
Logged

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #7 on: June 04, 2021, 05:05:30 pm »
0

In fact, I'm pretty sure all your Supplier cards could be implemented as Night-Treasures that simply stated "You may spend $x to..."

None of them really make use of the mechanic of being able to play after buying. The times where that's useful are when you want to get a bought card either into play or into your next hand, or after playing Gamble/Toil and drawing into them.
Logged

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Respect: +1093
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #8 on: June 04, 2021, 05:07:44 pm »
0

I agree with the suggestion of making these dual-type cards, unless there is a compelling reason to have an entirely separate card type.  It could allow for some cool (or unintended) interactions with Storyteller, Black Market, Crown, etc.

In my opinion, those interaction are the compelling reason to have an entirely separate type (not so much with those cards, but more with the likes of Counterfeit, Mine, Taxman, etc.).


I'm also curious about the reasoning behind this:
Quote
Once a player plays a Supplier, they may buy the purchase(s) as many times as that player has the Buys and resources to afford to do (subject to text on the card limiting such buying).

I think that it allows more design possibilities this way. It opens up the possibility of inexpensive purchases that give +1 Buy and therefore can be repeated as many times as a player can afford. If you wanted a design that requires the player to play a copy of the Supplier for each purchase, you could add "Once per turn" to it.


Unless you're playing a slog, it does really provide much incentive for having more than one copy of a Supplier in your deck.

That will probably be true of many Suppliers, but it is also true of Moneylender. (That said, trying to design a card that gives players a reason to buy more than one copy could be an interesting approach).


It also raises the question of why the card should be a Supplier rather than an Event.  The obvious difference is that your Supplier is not guaranteed to be available to you during every buy phase, so perhaps that needs to be taken into consideration when designing a Supplier.

That is a very good question/suggestion. Definitely something to consider when designing a card.


For example, I don't think Ranch really adds much over Ride to justify having an entirely new card type. 

You already mentioned that the value proposition of Suppliers needs to be much better relative to an Event, given that Suppliers could really end up being a junk card in your deck. Of the examples you posted, Miners and Ranch look quite weak.

I said these were examples, I didn't say they were good examples. I mostly wanted to show people see what the cards looked like, as I felt the explanation might not have done that in the most clear way. I agree that both of those cards are rather weak (although I think Miners could be useful on some boards). I put Ranch out there as a suggestion of how one might turn an Event into a Supplier (but I agree that it is not enough of an improvement).
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.

emtzalex

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 622
  • Respect: +1093
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #9 on: June 04, 2021, 05:13:13 pm »
0

In fact, I'm pretty sure all your Supplier cards could be implemented as Night-Treasures that simply stated "You may spend $x to..."

None of them really make use of the mechanic of being able to play after buying. The times where that's useful are when you want to get a bought card either into play or into your next hand, or after playing Gamble/Toil and drawing into them.

Again, I didn't put most of my cards out there because I wanted to allow for the most creative space possible. It's a design contest, you all are supposed to figure out designs that are worth buying, worth having in your deck, and that makes sense for them to be cards rather than Events. If you don't want to do that, you don't have to submit an entry.
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.

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +210
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #10 on: June 04, 2021, 06:05:34 pm »
+1

Well, here is my first attempt at a design. I still think the dual type ought to be necessary to further clarify that it is played in the Buy phase.



In my implementation, taking an effect from a Supplier does not use up a buy, as far too often you would just want to include "+1 Buy" for the effect to be worth it.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2021, 06:41:34 pm by The Alchemist »
Logged

Gubump

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1365
  • Respect: +1275
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #11 on: June 05, 2021, 12:24:31 am »
0

Well, here is my first attempt at a design. I still think the dual type ought to be necessary to further clarify that it is played in the Buy phase.



In my implementation, taking an effect from a Supplier does not use up a buy, as far too often you would just want to include "+1 Buy" for the effect to be worth it.

This should probably be limited to Actions and Treasures (the playing part) so that you can't play your Victory cards. Also, the top corners should say instead of $? since it's always worth .
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Shard of Honor and his Dominion Card Image Generator (the new fork).
If you're having font issues with the generator, click this link and click on the button to request temporary access to the demo server that loads the font.

Aquila

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 483
  • Respect: +691
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #12 on: June 05, 2021, 04:39:52 am »
+2

Revised entry:


Quote
Caravaneer - Supplier Gathering, $4 cost.
Exile a non-Victory card from the Supply to put 1VP on the Caravaneer pile.
$4: take all the VP on the Caravaneer pile.

Edit: reduced cost to $4, moved Exile to Supplier mode play and removed Action type, fixed the VP purchase price at $4 (rather than $3 + $1 per card you have in Exile).
« Last Edit: June 08, 2021, 04:39:16 am by Aquila »
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 273
  • Respect: +357
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #13 on: June 05, 2021, 09:27:58 am »
+3

I agree with the suggestion of making these dual-type cards, unless there is a compelling reason to have an entirely separate card type.  It could allow for some cool (or unintended) interactions with Storyteller, Black Market, Crown, etc.

I think this mechanic is interesting, but I echo this sentiment as well. In fact, I would go for the following approach.
  • The Supplier is a subtype of any type of card that can be in play during the Buy phase. The Supplier type has no say in when the card is playable. (so a Night/Duration/Supplier card would be possible if you are bold)
  • The purchasing options are available during your buy phase if and only if the card is in play. (so for a Night/Duration/Supplier card, the options are available next turn)
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 273
  • Respect: +357
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #14 on: June 05, 2021, 01:49:48 pm »
+3

Anyway, here is my submission.
Logged

fika monster

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +297
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #15 on: June 06, 2021, 12:31:15 pm »
+1

    V1: Outdated. See version 2:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20812.msg871269#msg871269


Card idea: What if "return to your phase" was a card all on its own?


Put "night" on it, so that it can become very exciting in night games. I made it say "return to any phase" so that if there is, say, a Dawn card in the kingdom, you could circumvent the dawn cards weakness. At a cost!

Potential Issues:
  • "return to X phase" costs too much or little?
  • "+2 Actions" for 2$ is too good? Since you don't spend an action on Benevolent Goblin, its effectively a +3 Actions for 2$
  • In kingdoms without workshops, might it be boring?
[li] [/li][/list]
« Last Edit: June 07, 2021, 04:44:14 pm by fika monster »
Logged

naitchman

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 242
  • Respect: +259
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #16 on: June 06, 2021, 05:21:36 pm »
+2

I agree with the suggestion of making these dual-type cards, unless there is a compelling reason to have an entirely separate card type.  It could allow for some cool (or unintended) interactions with Storyteller, Black Market, Crown, etc.

I think this mechanic is interesting, but I echo this sentiment as well. In fact, I would go for the following approach.
  • The Supplier is a subtype of any type of card that can be in play during the Buy phase. The Supplier type has no say in when the card is playable. (so a Night/Duration/Supplier card would be possible if you are bold)
  • The purchasing options are available during your buy phase if and only if the card is in play. (so for a Night/Duration/Supplier card, the options are available next turn)

I second this.
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1078
  • Respect: +1206
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
« Reply #17 on: June 06, 2021, 06:58:43 pm »
+1

    Card idea: What if "return to your phase" was a card all on its own?


    Put "night" on it, so that it can become very exciting in night games. I made it say "return to any phase" so that if there is, say, a Dawn card in the kingdom, you could circumvent the dawn cards weakness. At a cost!

    Potential Issues:
    • "return to X phase" costs too much or little?
    • "+2 Actions" for 2$ is too good? Since you don't spend an action on Benevolent Goblin, its effectively a +3 Actions for 2$
    • In kingdoms without workshops, might it be boring?
    [li] [/li][/list]

    I'm a bit confused how this would work.  Are you able to choose more than one option, paying $2 for each option chosen?
    Logged
    They/them

    emtzalex

    • Minion
    • *****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 622
    • Respect: +1093
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #18 on: June 06, 2021, 08:07:20 pm »
    0

    So this fits the rules?


    Quote
    Caravaneer - Action Supplier Gathering, $5 cost.
    If it's your Action phase, +1 Action and Exile a non-Victory card from the Supply to put 1VP here.
    Otherwise, for $3 + $1 per card you have in Exile: take all the VP here.
    Like Crown, either the Action phase play or Buy phase Supplier play. The Supplier cost varies, and a purchase uses a Buy. The $5 cost or Supplier cost might be off, but here's the premise at least.

    Yes.
    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.

    emtzalex

    • Minion
    • *****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 622
    • Respect: +1093
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #19 on: June 06, 2021, 08:15:26 pm »
    0

    I agree with the suggestion of making these dual-type cards, unless there is a compelling reason to have an entirely separate card type.  It could allow for some cool (or unintended) interactions with Storyteller, Black Market, Crown, etc.

    I think this mechanic is interesting, but I echo this sentiment as well. In fact, I would go for the following approach.
    • The Supplier is a subtype of any type of card that can be in play during the Buy phase. The Supplier type has no say in when the card is playable. (so a Night/Duration/Supplier card would be possible if you are bold)
    • The purchasing options are available during your buy phase if and only if the card is in play. (so for a Night/Duration/Supplier card, the options are available next turn)

    This is another way that Suppliers could be implemented, but I don't see a really good reason for it. I don't understand the problem with a new type of card that is played in a fairly straightforward way. (I put all of the complex rules interactions in the description because the nature of this contest is that those end up being implicated, but the vast majority of the time the cards will simply be played during a player's Buy phase). If the "can-play-it-after-a-buy" element is that confusing/challenging, I would rather drop that then really significantly rework the cards as this suggests.

    By requiring them to be dual-type, you are needlessly complicating and adding potentially unwanted interactions to the simplest of these cards (i.e. the ones that just offer something for sale). All of those interactions are still possible where Supplier is its own type (by making it a dual-type card) without forcing the complexity on the cards that don't need it.

    I'm not really understanding what is so challenging about the mechanic as I laid it out. If it's really the color's similarity to Treasure, I'll find a different color. That being said, if you want to submit a card with a modified version of the rules, you can feel free to do so, and I'll judge them in that context (but your submission post needs to expressly state this; otherwise, I will presume you are using my rules as set out in the original post).
    « Last Edit: June 06, 2021, 08:19:28 pm by emtzalex »
    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.

    Timinou

    • Witch
    • *****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 486
    • Respect: +628
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #20 on: June 06, 2021, 11:32:31 pm »
    +2

    I was thinking about whether a card like this is overly complicated as a Treasure-Supplier rather than just a Supplier:



    It could definitely work as a single-type Supplier card, but I think it's more intuitive as a dual-type card and I don't think there are any crazy or unwanted interactions.

    Fare is like Expedition in card form.  With Expedition, you essentially pay $1.5 per extra card, so you get a better deal with Fare if you have sufficient Buys.  To some extent, you could even think of it as a more expensive version of Supplies.

    I'm not sure if this will be my final submission but just wanted to post it for discussion.
    Logged

    The Alchemist

    • Golem
    • ****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 175
    • Respect: +210
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #21 on: June 06, 2021, 11:38:19 pm »
    0


    By requiring them to be dual-type, you are needlessly complicating and adding potentially unwanted interactions to the simplest of these cards (i.e. the ones that just offer something for sale). All of those interactions are still possible where Supplier is its own type (by making it a dual-type card) without forcing the complexity on the cards that don't need it.


    I also agree with the two points laid out by Timinou. Having an entirely new card type with new color and all is far more needlessly complicated than a dual-type. Its the reason why Looters is simply a secondary type instead of an entirely new category of cards. Nights were pretty simple as far as a new type category goes, and yet Nocturne is widely considered the most complicated expansion, partly due to that mechanic. There's no reason why the simplest of the cards you mentioned can't be simply dual-typed treasures, that is a far simpler approach than the rules laid out in the op, and it seems that sentiment is agreed upon unanimously.
    Logged

    Timinou

    • Witch
    • *****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 486
    • Respect: +628
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #22 on: June 06, 2021, 11:44:11 pm »
    0

    On the other hand, I could see a card like this working better as a single-type card:

    NOT A SUBMISSION


    This exploits the ability of a Supplier to be played after you have already bought cards in the Buy phase. 
    Logged

    The Alchemist

    • Golem
    • ****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 175
    • Respect: +210
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #23 on: June 06, 2021, 11:53:18 pm »
    0

    This is incidental to the overall contest and discussion, but Miners and Ranch are incredibly weak. Here is a card that almost exactly replicates the ability of Miners, while being strictly stronger than it, yet it is still quite weak:



    This lets you get 2 silvers for $4, a silver and gold for $7, and 2 golds for $10, without being nearly as restrictive as Mine.

    And Ranch could just as well have stated "You may pay $2 to have this card be a cantrip later, or $4 to be a lab". It goes without saying that a one-shot cantrip that costs $2 is worthless, and one-shot lab for $4 is significantly weaker than both encampment and experiment.
    Logged

    herw

    • Golem
    • ****
    • Offline Offline
    • Posts: 196
    • Respect: +77
      • View Profile
    Re: Fan Card Mechanics Week 12: High on your own Supplier
    « Reply #24 on: June 07, 2021, 12:12:54 am »
    0

    not a submission

    There is no need for a new type of "supplier".
    In March 2021 I developed the mechanics of money bags. The idea behind it is that you can play treasure cards (!) for additional instructions at any stage of a turn. This has proven itself in practice.
    The advantage is also that the mechanics are so easy to understand (especially by inexperienced players) that you do not need a new card type.

    three examples

     

    Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
    « Last Edit: June 07, 2021, 12:29:26 am by herw »
    Logged
    Pages: [1] 2 3  All
     

    Page created in 0.093 seconds with 21 queries.