Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash  (Read 4534 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Aquila

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 525
  • Respect: +764
    • View Profile
Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« on: July 21, 2021, 03:35:34 pm »
+5

This contest focuses on card costs.

Instead of paying $, debt or Potions, you pay with the cards you own. It's another type of currency to mess Chariot Race around. There's a card icon (you can type it like [ ]) in the bottom left, and a description of the cost in the card's text.


Quote
Campsite - Action, [ ] cost.
+1 Card
+2 Actions

-
[ ]: discard 2 Victory cards, revealing them.

So at the Buy phase, you declare you use a Buy on Campsite. You first pay the price, reveal and discard two Victories. If you did, then you buy the card (when-buy effects trigger, -1 Buy) then gain a Campsite (when-gain effects trigger). You can't pay the price of an empty card-cost pile.

To clear up Chariot Race: each different card cost counts as a different currency, so they can't be compared. If there are two cards with the same card cost (e.g Campsite and a Smithy with '[ ]: discard two Victories...'), then they tie. I.e., pure card costs never win!
And so, nothing that gains cards costing up to $, debt or Potion can gain a card cost card. (And since the expensiveness of card costs vary so greatly - like Campsite is cheap and 'trash a Gold from your hand' is expensive - I don't recommend creating one.)

Let's bring Animal Fair into this too. It could easily have been '[ ]: trash an Action card from your hand'. Because it costs $7*, it can be made into a Province with Way of the Butterfly and also be bought with $7, extra functions that it benefits from.
So, it would be nice to see designs that benefit from being limited to just the card cost. With Campsite, I feel it benefits in that it's distinguished from the standard Village and calls for a different kind of engine.

Discarding and trashing your cards will be the most likely costs, but technically, you could also make a card cost out of a certain condition your cards in play need to meet, like '[ ]: have 5 Actions in play'; think how much of a cost it will actually be.

You can combine the card cost with other currencies! With Chariot Race, imagine the hypothetical Smithy with a cost of $1[ ] 'discard two victories'; that would beat Campsite. Also, you could Remodel/Upgrade/Butterfly a Campsite into it.


I think that's everything mechanics wise. I won't ask for mock-ups nor will I favour those who use them, but here is a link to the generator with the card cost icon set up if you so desire. (Just copy and paste the custom icon symbol.)

Contest closes on: Wednesday 28th July 20:30 forum time.

Please enjoy!

Edit: added more to $[ ] costs.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2021, 05:08:37 pm by Aquila »
Logged

venusambassador

  • Pearl Diver
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #1 on: July 21, 2021, 04:32:54 pm »
+1

oh, cool, i've already got a card that works for this one!


a Lost City variant that's almost always equivalent or better- the only worse case is if you draw 2 cards, have a hand of green and yellow + a smithy or moat thing, then draw some more actions. if it's not your only source of non-terminal draw, though, or if you have villages, it's essentially +2 cards +as many actions as you need. kind of a reverse city quarter, too, in that way.

i originally priced it at 8 debt, but i think it's more interesting this way- are you willing to sacrifice those cheap actions for a much better action, given that the better action wouldve given you a shot at playing those cheaper ones anyway? yes it's good with ruins but so are animal fair and advance. and way of the horse. i dont think that makes it broken
Logged

Gubump

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2021, 06:13:09 pm »
0

Equivalent or better? This is strictly worse than Lost City for the very reason you described; setting aside an Action card and playing it is strictly worse than +1 Action. With Thrones and terminal draw this becomes a significant disadvantage.

I agree that it is worse--the cost is huge and setting aside an Action card is indeed worse than +1 Action--but it isn't quite strictly worse than Lost City. Lost City can only play two cards.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2021, 06:14:51 pm by Gubump »
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.

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Respect: +1450
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2021, 06:43:25 pm »
0

Equivalent or better? This is strictly worse than Lost City for the very reason you described; setting aside an Action card and playing it is strictly worse than +1 Action. With Thrones and terminal draw this becomes a significant disadvantage.

I agree that it is worse--the cost is huge and setting aside an Action card is indeed worse than +1 Action--but it isn't quite strictly worse than Lost City. Lost City can only play two cards.

Also, the fact that it gets all of the Action cards out of your hand before you start resolving them has a variety of interactions with cards that care about what is (or isn't) in your hand: think Tactician, Diplomat, Shanty Town, and and draw-to-x (off the top of my head). (Although Tactician's synergy is more about the fact that you can have another Action card pending [for lack of a better term] when you play it and dump your hand.)
« Last Edit: July 21, 2021, 06:45:42 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.

Gubump

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2021, 07:15:53 pm »
+1

Equivalent or better? This is strictly worse than Lost City for the very reason you described; setting aside an Action card and playing it is strictly worse than +1 Action. With Thrones and terminal draw this becomes a significant disadvantage.

I agree that it is worse--the cost is huge and setting aside an Action card is indeed worse than +1 Action--but it isn't quite strictly worse than Lost City. Lost City can only play two cards.

Also, the fact that it gets all of the Action cards out of your hand before you start resolving them has a variety of interactions with cards that care about what is (or isn't) in your hand: think Tactician, Diplomat, Shanty Town, and and draw-to-x (off the top of my head). (Although Tactician's synergy is more about the fact that you can have another Action card pending [for lack of a better term] when you play it and dump your hand.)

There's way more times just getting +Actions would be better, though. If you draw this with a Smithy, you have no Actions left after playing this and the Smithy. If you draw Lost City and a Smithy, you can still keep playing Actions after playing the Smithy. You have to have this in hand at the same time as all cards you want to play with it; not true of +Actions. And terminal draw cards are more common than all those cases you listed, combined.
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.

Xen3k

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
  • Respect: +581
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2021, 08:10:41 pm »
+1



Quote
Bone Collector - [ ]
Action - Command
Choose one: Play a non-Command Action card from your Exile twice, discarding it; or play a non-Command Action card from your hand, Exiling it.
-
[ ]: Exile 2 non-Command Action cards you have in hand.

An emulator in the vein of Band of Misfits. The catch with Bone Collector is that you have to Exile Action cards for it to be useful, but it requires you to Exile Action cards to purchase as well, so that shouldn't be too much of a hassle. Possible busted combinations would be with Camel Train. Feedback is appreciated.

Edit: Changed design to try and not snowball so much. Discards the cards emulated from Exile and can Throne Room cards in hand to Exile them. It still acts as a Band of Misfits for whatever you have in your deck, but should take a bit more work and is less consistent. Cost to purchase is also bumped up.

Edit 2: Changed it a bit more. Throne Rooming happens from Exile now. Cost changed to require Exiling cards from hand. Changed wording so you cannot Exile Bone Collectors to buy a Bone Collector and then discard all Bone Collectors from Exile.

Old Versions
« Last Edit: July 23, 2021, 07:47:24 pm by Xen3k »
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2021, 08:26:29 pm »
+3



Quote
Bone Collector - [ ]
Action - Command
Play a non-Command Action card from your Exile, leaving it there.
----
[ ]: Exile a non-Duration Action card you have in play costing $2 or more.

An emulator in the vein of Band of Misfits. The catch with Bone Collector is that you have to Exile Action cards for it to be useful, but it requires you to Exile Action cards to purchase as well, so that shouldn't be too much of a hassle. Possible busted combinations would be with Camel Train. Feedback is appreciated.

Doesn't really seem like a cost to me. You're not losing anything by Exiling an Action card, cause you can still play it with Bone Collector.  In fact, if you already have other Bone Collectors, then you're effectively multiplying the card you just Exiled, because *all* of your Bone Collectors can play it. And unlike with trashing for Necromancer, you're only benefiting yourself
Logged
They/them

Xen3k

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 413
  • Respect: +581
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2021, 09:27:15 pm »
0



Quote
Bone Collector - [ ]
Action - Command
Play a non-Command Action card from your Exile, leaving it there.
----
[ ]: Exile a non-Duration Action card you have in play costing $2 or more.

An emulator in the vein of Band of Misfits. The catch with Bone Collector is that you have to Exile Action cards for it to be useful, but it requires you to Exile Action cards to purchase as well, so that shouldn't be too much of a hassle. Possible busted combinations would be with Camel Train. Feedback is appreciated.

Doesn't really seem like a cost to me. You're not losing anything by Exiling an Action card, cause you can still play it with Bone Collector.  In fact, if you already have other Bone Collectors, then you're effectively multiplying the card you just Exiled, because *all* of your Bone Collectors can play it. And unlike with trashing for Necromancer, you're only benefiting yourself

This is an apt critique. The main issue I see is the fact Bone Collectors will snowball and make single purchase of a $5 or more cost card multiply if Exiled. I am changing to a bit of a different design.
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2021, 10:14:10 pm »
0



Quote
Bone Collector - [ ]
Action - Command
Play a non-Command Action card from your Exile, leaving it there.
----
[ ]: Exile a non-Duration Action card you have in play costing $2 or more.

An emulator in the vein of Band of Misfits. The catch with Bone Collector is that you have to Exile Action cards for it to be useful, but it requires you to Exile Action cards to purchase as well, so that shouldn't be too much of a hassle. Possible busted combinations would be with Camel Train. Feedback is appreciated.

Doesn't really seem like a cost to me. You're not losing anything by Exiling an Action card, cause you can still play it with Bone Collector.  In fact, if you already have other Bone Collectors, then you're effectively multiplying the card you just Exiled, because *all* of your Bone Collectors can play it. And unlike with trashing for Necromancer, you're only benefiting yourself

This is an apt critique. The main issue I see is the fact Bone Collectors will snowball and make single purchase of a $5 or more cost card multiply if Exiled. I am changing to a bit of a different design.

Yeah, also you could buy, then subsequently Exile, a single expensive Action, such as King's Court, then just buy up a bunch of cheap Actions and Exile them to gain new Bone Collectors, each of which could play that Exiled KC.  Incorporating something like Necromancer's face-up/face-down mechanism could weaken that a bit. Maybe also "Exile an Action card that you don't have a copy of in Exile"

Knights would be especially strong with this, since an Exiled Knight being played by Bone Collector would be safe from trashing, and the Bone Collector itself would also be safe from other player's Knights
Logged
They/them

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Respect: +1450
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2021, 10:23:56 pm »
0

Equivalent or better? This is strictly worse than Lost City for the very reason you described; setting aside an Action card and playing it is strictly worse than +1 Action. With Thrones and terminal draw this becomes a significant disadvantage.

I agree that it is worse--the cost is huge and setting aside an Action card is indeed worse than +1 Action--but it isn't quite strictly worse than Lost City. Lost City can only play two cards.

Also, the fact that it gets all of the Action cards out of your hand before you start resolving them has a variety of interactions with cards that care about what is (or isn't) in your hand: think Tactician, Diplomat, Shanty Town, and and draw-to-x (off the top of my head). (Although Tactician's synergy is more about the fact that you can have another Action card pending [for lack of a better term] when you play it and dump your hand.)

There's way more times just getting +Actions would be better, though. If you draw this with a Smithy, you have no Actions left after playing this and the Smithy. If you draw Lost City and a Smithy, you can still keep playing Actions after playing the Smithy. You have to have this in hand at the same time as all cards you want to play with it; not true of +Actions. And terminal draw cards are more common than all those cases you listed, combined.

Of course. I was pointing out a couple of those quirky combos you sometimes get with interesting Dominion cards (like Tactician/Black Market or Diplomat/Cathedral).
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.

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: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #10 on: July 22, 2021, 10:37:59 am »
0


Quote
Bribe • Action
The first time you play this on your turn, after your turn ends, take an Arbiter turn. Gain a copy of any cards they do during that turn.
-
: Trash a card from your hand costing $4 or more.
The Arbiter gains it.

Setup: The Arbiter starts with 2 Silvers, 5 Coppers, and 3 Estates.

A cross between Visit (from here) and Possession, with fewer headaches than either ruleswise (and potentially more game-wise - there's only one Arbiter, so you may help your opponent by helping the Arbiter.)

commentary:
Fizzles the 2nd+ time playing it on a regular player turn. Fizzles when the player acting as The Arbiter plays Bribe (you're acting as the Arbiter during the Arbiter turn - your turn is never happening when you play it as the arbiter, so no "play possession while possessing someone" mixups). Potentially brutal with duration-attacks like Swamp Hag / Haunted Woods / Enchantress, given that the Arbiter doesn't follow a regular turn order.

Some basic metrics:
Potential Arbiter openings are between $7 and $2 (2 in 12 are $7/$2 or reversed; 4 in 12, $6/$3 or reversed; 6 in 12 $5/$4 or reversed).

FAQ stuff:
  • The Arbiter deck should be initially made from cards as out-of-the-supply as possible - use, yknow, player six's estates, but if you don't have spare silvers or coppers, taking them from the supply is acceptable.
  • The Arbiter never starts with heirlooms or shelters, and doesn't score at the end of the game.
  • The Arbiter doesn't get hit with curses from Witch or similar cards - they are not in that "each other player" category; They don't participate in Masquerade unless they play it, during which they're assumed to be to the left of the player who is acting as the Arbiter (do take care not to mix your cards and the arbiter's cards when you use these both).
  • The Arbiter does not do things on extra turns - when your turn acting as the Arbiter is complete, you step down as them, so you do not play the three card hand from Outpost or what have you. You do however, cycle an appropriate number of cards from their deck as though they'd passed their turn and proceeded straight to clean up. The Arbiter does not get to play Possession hands - the affected player merely cycles the appropriate number of cards from their deck.
  • The Arbiter never gets to do the trashing portion of Donate (happens after their turn, so you no longer get to act as the Arbiter), though they can collect the debt from it.
  • The Arbiter does have useable adventures tokens (again, use player six's or the orange ones or whatever, or make your own out of printer paper and sharpie if you somehow want to play this in a six player game).
  • You don't get any Spoils the Arbiter would from playing pillage or marauder or bandit camp, because those aren't in the supply. You would get ruins from Death Cart, if the names aligned to be the same though
   
« Last Edit: July 22, 2021, 01:07:53 pm by spineflu »
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #11 on: July 23, 2021, 01:06:48 am »
+1


Quote
Daemon
Night - Duration
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until revealing two Action cards. Discard the other cards and set the Action cards aside (on this). Play them at the start of your next turn, in either order.
-
: Discard two Action cards.

A combination of Golem and Ghost. Like Golem, it digs for two Action cards, but like Ghost, it doesn't play them until the start of your next turn.
Logged
They/them

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2005
  • Respect: +2109
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2021, 06:26:05 am »
+1

« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 06:32:51 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

emtzalex

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 840
  • Respect: +1450
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #13 on: July 26, 2021, 12:31:17 pm »
+4

My Submission:


Quote from: Humility
HUMILITY  []
ACTION
Discard a card. Gain a cheaper card to your hand.

[]: discard three Treasure cards.
                                                                                               

This card's on-play ability is one I have been toying with for a while in a different context. What I find interesting about it is that how significantly it changes in terms of its strength. Throughout most of the game, the effect is potentially slightly beneficial. You could imagine contexts where you are happy to trade a sometimes useful $4 Action card (especially one that is collision dependent like Baron or Treasure Map) for a Silver, or to trade one of two terminal Actions (especially terminal draw like Smithy) for a cheaper village. There could even be contexts where you would be willing to be junked a Copper (by discarding an Estate or Shelter) early in order to hit an important price point for a buy. However, all of these are relatively minor improvements to your hand, which will almost never justify playing a terminal Action (costing both an Action and a card in your hand) to gain the effect (especially not to get a village). (There are exceptions to this; it would become a lot more appealing in a game with Tunnel where it was the only means of discarding and there was a solid $2 Action like Hamlet or Encampment).

That might suggest putting the effect onto a cantrip, or finding a way to get it without having to play a card first: on a Project, an Edict, or a Reserve card, as a non-discarding Reaction (although this might require some additional limitation), or perhaps as an optional effect given to other players as an on-buy penalty (like Lost City's). The problem with these is that while for most of the game the effect is somewhere between meh and okay, at the end of the game it becomes crazy powerful. The ability to replace a Province with a Gold (or a Colony with a Platinum) is extremely strong, and the situation where you would want to do so will happen in virtually every game.

I wasn't thinking about that effect at all when I started toying with different card costs and what they could do. I tried to think of something kind of envelope-pushing, but then I decided I should at least play with simpler versions. Looking at discarding Treasures, it occurred to me that by giving something a card cost of "discard x Treasure cards" means that the card will (generally) increase in its effective cost over the course of the game. If you open with this, it effectively costs $3. But if you buy it later in the game by discarding a Gold and two Silvers, it effectively costs $7.

After having this insight, I thought it would be fitting to pair a cost that went up over the course of a game with an effect that got more powerful at the end of the game. You can open with this card for cheap, but you are probably not going get much use out of it for some time. On the other hand, if you want try to buy it right before it becomes useful, you will likely be spending a lot more (and, as opposed to if it had just cost $4, even in a game with no +Buy you cannot get it on a hand that produced a single peddler and drew you into a Gold and 4 Victory cards).
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.

Gubump

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2021, 05:27:32 pm »
0


This looks weird. In Kingdoms without other extra Buys you gotta add enough payload cards to hit $8 and then you gotta waste 8 Coins and one Buy on a $4 strength card that then semi-competes with all the other payload card in your deck.
Sure, the next ones are a bit of a freebie but I have a hunch that this is simply too late in the game, spending those $8 on a Province is probably better than building up so late towards a two Provinces per turn deck.

It isn't a $4 strength card. It would compare too favorably to Horse Traders to cost the same as it.
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.

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2021, 06:01:27 pm »
+1



When you buy it, you get to decide your next turn with great control. But When you play heirs gift, its an okay sifter. Be careful or you might get junked with the gift later!

Edit: Wording changes per gubumps suggestion


Edit 2: Altered the top effect to make it unique. Now its like... a minus - Action token but find the card you want.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2021, 03:49:02 pm by fika monster »
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

Gubump

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #16 on: July 26, 2021, 07:23:24 pm »
+1



When you buy it, you get to decide your next turn with great control. But When you play heirs gift, its an okay sifter. Be careful or you might get junked with the gift later!

The bottom could be phrased more simply. "[]: Put two cards you would discard from play this turn onto your deck. When this is your first buy in a turn, +1 Buy." The current wording also doesn't work because it's checking if it's your first buy period, rather than your first buy this turn.
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.

Timinou

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 486
  • Respect: +634
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2021, 11:00:34 pm »
+1



Mausoleum provides an alternative way to score once you have a bunch of green cards in your deck.  It might even be OK to open with one in some cases.  Unlike Cemetery, you can only trash two cards with this and you're unlikely to be able to trash your Estates with it (at least early in the game).  You can't do the same tricks that you can with Cemetery and certain gainers like Sculptor, but 4VP is nothing to sneeze at.
Logged

fika monster

  • Witch
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
  • 27 year old swedish guy. PFP by haps
  • Respect: +459
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #18 on: July 27, 2021, 03:42:56 pm »
0

This contest focuses on card costs.


Does it have to be a Card or can it be a WELP?
Logged
Swedish guy, Furry hipster otter

Aquila

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 525
  • Respect: +764
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #19 on: July 27, 2021, 04:21:03 pm »
+3

Time has flown and it's already just 24 hours left on this contest.

I so far have:

Underground City by venusambassador
Bone Collector by Xen3k
Bribe by spineflu
Daemon by mxdata
Sycophant by NoMoreFun
Humility by emtzalex
Heir's Gift by fika monster
Mausoleum by Timinou

This contest focuses on card costs.


Does it have to be a Card or can it be a WELP?
Go for it, WELP is fine.
Logged

Aquila

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 525
  • Respect: +764
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2021, 04:10:43 am »
+3

Results

Card costs are a wide and diverse field to look into. Many factors are involved such as timing of availability, expensiveness, effect on the card's other functions, and the route one takes to purchase it.
Many designs here looked at costs that interact with the on-play effect. I guess it's easy to create a meaningful cost that way, and there have been some great executions as a result.

Onto the analysis:

venusambassador

+: Working towards a high payout of (simulated) +Actions can be fun.
-: play Actions from hand is much less flexible than +Actions, so it's very influenced by shuffle randomness.
Cost: very heavy considering the impact on the card itself. It certainly seems too much.
Overview: it plays very similarly to City Quarter (especially with the original 8 debt) in loving high Action density. The cost could be improved, as could changing the play effect to, e.g., reveal hand, +1 Action per Action revealed.

Xen3k

+: It creates a different strategy involving mega turns and an ever changing deck size.
-: The cases where this really shines seem to be limited to other cards that Exile.
Cost: two Actions not played now is a big sting, but setting up powerful plays later helps soothe this. It's an investment where the bigger cost now in terms of usefulness of the Actions usually means more payoff later. The Bone Collector starts off with fuel, but then gets much weaker when it needs to refuel; because of this balance is hard to call, but if it's right then this is clever.
Overview: It might be too heavily influenced by the presence of other Exiling cards, and a bit too weak for its cost without them. I wonder if it couldn't go bigger on the number of Actions moved to Exile somehow. '[ ]: Exile 2 or more...' maybe. In any case, I feel Throne-Command from Exile has potential to go somewhere.

spineflu

+: definitely a new, interactive spin to add to the game. Although I've never played with Possession, I could see this being the nicer play experience. The Arbiter rules for the most part make intuitive sense.
-: randomness could be an issue, like if one player pays a Gold for a Bribe, gets to hit $8, then the other players miss out. It will feel particularly bad. The first player to use Bribe would be at an advantage when debt is present, if I understand correctly; they get a debt free City Quarter or $6 out of Capital whilst the Arbiter has to carry the debt to its next user (or players choose to not play Bribe then, which would be sad). So it needs to shift debt to the player using it like Possession does. Flag Bearer is funny too, paying one for a Bribe means the Arbiter gets the Flag; might be a fun desirability.
Cost: it is effective here, avoiding $ cost so Bribes can't end up in the Arbiter deck without deliberate work involving Masquerade. But is trashing a $4 to access it balanced? Feast would suggest a power level of $5 or more, but needing a Buy instead of an Action and you can use the $4 for a bit first. Yielding from $2-$7 plus whatever contributed cards add could well average out at $5 strength. Testing could prove this very wrong though.
Overview: a big list of FAQs would make this more of an academic exercise than a game for some, but polish them up with everything made safe and it could be worth a try.

mxdata

+: Paying for a splitter with unplayed Actions can be interesting, and if the deck is filled with terminals to make payment easier, the play is still a bit clunky using these.
-: just the name I guess, nothing mechanically negative. Some may not like the similarity to other splitters/enablers.
Cost: there is the obvious self synergy where paying for one of these helps set up a copy you have in hand, but there are other good points: the Actions you pay can't be too bad or require precise timing, since they can be a disadvantage when this plays them, making the cost a little more expensive.
Overview: the first impression is good. It's rather like Bone Collector in the cost of 2 Action cards that can fuel the on-play, but because of consistent power level this is a bit easier to assess. Testing would need to show the the cost is balanced on average to be sure, but it feels about right.

NoMoreFun

+: Very simple to understand, it's a +Buy with added payload when the deck is ready for it.
-: It seems rather weak. The opportunity cost of first buying it when you don't have any other +Buys is rather large, although getting copies becomes much easier and they may be preferred over Gold.
Cost: it's rather loosely defined as a 'card' cost. I did say cards in play could meet a condition and count as a card cost, but here, the cards themselves are only indirectly involved. Like, you could pay 8 Coffers and not use cards at all. So it could be confusing.
Overview: the cost is the biggest design snag for me. I would suggest that a $* cost be more appropriate ('if you have $8 or more this costs $0 (or $X less)'). It might be a neat card for some audiences then, if not too similar to Animal Fair.

emtzalex

+: Simple discard for benefit that has a neat scaling effect.
-: it could have the potential to overwhelm with options, but Provinces are a standout favoured target to simplify things.
Cost: pure card cost avoids this gaining itself, and the scaling to Silvers/Golds/kingdom Treasures is potentially neat when draw is limited and picking up 3 Coppers won't happen. Good choice.
Overview: simple design that's quite strongly affected by the presence of draw. Province discarding might be such a standout function that this is actually quite narrow and scripted to most players; this either makes it interesting for working out the high skill potential with other targets, or uninteresting. I can't decide myself.

fika monster

+: An extremely cheap cost with a tame effect in engines.
-: terminally pick any card would lend itself to big money over engines, and it might be rather too good at setting up $8 hands by lining Golds and Silvers up.
Cost: it's so cheap that gaining the Heir's Gift itself is the cost, in a way. One can pick up a free double Scheme at the cost of a terminal in the deck. This can be made into a good design premise.
Overview: the on-buy Scheme and the finding any card are two functions this card has, and they are freely available. Put together, I fear money strategies will pick up 4 or 5 Provinces too fast.

Timinou

+: Alt VP with a card cost makes for an alternative way to win: trash cards whilst keeping some green around.
-: Shuffle randomness can decide how buyable this is, so one can get a VP lead purely by chance sometimes, but this is true for a lot of card costs.
Cost: pure card cost means this calls for a strategy involving draw and gaining cards to trash, or picking the odd one up at an opportune time. It can pay for itself, which helps cheapen the cost to just the trashing later on.
Overview: I have a similar idea to this in my own folder of designs, which rewards more VP for having few non-Victories in the deck and costs trashing 3 non-Victories from hand. That idea would benefit from being $* cost to be more buyable. This can get away with just the card cost, I think, so it's a solid design.


Daemon, Humility and Mausoleum would all need to reveal the discarded cards with their costs. I haven't penalised for this, though.

Shortlist: Bone Collector, Bribe, Daemon, Humility, Mausoleum.

Runner-up: Mausoleum by Timinou

Winner: Daemon by mxdata

My choice based entirely on mechanics. Mausoleum is very likeable, but the randomness of when buying one is correct was just enough for me to put it behind the winner. Daemon's cost seems safe and interacts nicely with its on-play effect, so it would seem to be the most consistently well-playing entry.
Logged

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: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2021, 09:43:50 am »
0

Good call, re: debt, and thank you for judging; Honestly i'm surprised there were so few entries this week - card costs seemed like one of the more straightforward challenges we've had in these.

I had a b-side/outtake for this one that I kinda liked, i'm gonna share it here.


I went with bribe because it seemed more novel.
Logged

mxdata

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1190
  • Respect: +1335
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #22 on: July 30, 2021, 10:49:49 pm »
+1

Results

Card costs are a wide and diverse field to look into. Many factors are involved such as timing of availability, expensiveness, effect on the card's other functions, and the route one takes to purchase it.
Many designs here looked at costs that interact with the on-play effect. I guess it's easy to create a meaningful cost that way, and there have been some great executions as a result.

Onto the analysis:

venusambassador

+: Working towards a high payout of (simulated) +Actions can be fun.
-: play Actions from hand is much less flexible than +Actions, so it's very influenced by shuffle randomness.
Cost: very heavy considering the impact on the card itself. It certainly seems too much.
Overview: it plays very similarly to City Quarter (especially with the original 8 debt) in loving high Action density. The cost could be improved, as could changing the play effect to, e.g., reveal hand, +1 Action per Action revealed.

Xen3k

+: It creates a different strategy involving mega turns and an ever changing deck size.
-: The cases where this really shines seem to be limited to other cards that Exile.
Cost: two Actions not played now is a big sting, but setting up powerful plays later helps soothe this. It's an investment where the bigger cost now in terms of usefulness of the Actions usually means more payoff later. The Bone Collector starts off with fuel, but then gets much weaker when it needs to refuel; because of this balance is hard to call, but if it's right then this is clever.
Overview: It might be too heavily influenced by the presence of other Exiling cards, and a bit too weak for its cost without them. I wonder if it couldn't go bigger on the number of Actions moved to Exile somehow. '[ ]: Exile 2 or more...' maybe. In any case, I feel Throne-Command from Exile has potential to go somewhere.

spineflu

+: definitely a new, interactive spin to add to the game. Although I've never played with Possession, I could see this being the nicer play experience. The Arbiter rules for the most part make intuitive sense.
-: randomness could be an issue, like if one player pays a Gold for a Bribe, gets to hit $8, then the other players miss out. It will feel particularly bad. The first player to use Bribe would be at an advantage when debt is present, if I understand correctly; they get a debt free City Quarter or $6 out of Capital whilst the Arbiter has to carry the debt to its next user (or players choose to not play Bribe then, which would be sad). So it needs to shift debt to the player using it like Possession does. Flag Bearer is funny too, paying one for a Bribe means the Arbiter gets the Flag; might be a fun desirability.
Cost: it is effective here, avoiding $ cost so Bribes can't end up in the Arbiter deck without deliberate work involving Masquerade. But is trashing a $4 to access it balanced? Feast would suggest a power level of $5 or more, but needing a Buy instead of an Action and you can use the $4 for a bit first. Yielding from $2-$7 plus whatever contributed cards add could well average out at $5 strength. Testing could prove this very wrong though.
Overview: a big list of FAQs would make this more of an academic exercise than a game for some, but polish them up with everything made safe and it could be worth a try.

mxdata

+: Paying for a splitter with unplayed Actions can be interesting, and if the deck is filled with terminals to make payment easier, the play is still a bit clunky using these.
-: just the name I guess, nothing mechanically negative. Some may not like the similarity to other splitters/enablers.
Cost: there is the obvious self synergy where paying for one of these helps set up a copy you have in hand, but there are other good points: the Actions you pay can't be too bad or require precise timing, since they can be a disadvantage when this plays them, making the cost a little more expensive.
Overview: the first impression is good. It's rather like Bone Collector in the cost of 2 Action cards that can fuel the on-play, but because of consistent power level this is a bit easier to assess. Testing would need to show the the cost is balanced on average to be sure, but it feels about right.

NoMoreFun

+: Very simple to understand, it's a +Buy with added payload when the deck is ready for it.
-: It seems rather weak. The opportunity cost of first buying it when you don't have any other +Buys is rather large, although getting copies becomes much easier and they may be preferred over Gold.
Cost: it's rather loosely defined as a 'card' cost. I did say cards in play could meet a condition and count as a card cost, but here, the cards themselves are only indirectly involved. Like, you could pay 8 Coffers and not use cards at all. So it could be confusing.
Overview: the cost is the biggest design snag for me. I would suggest that a $* cost be more appropriate ('if you have $8 or more this costs $0 (or $X less)'). It might be a neat card for some audiences then, if not too similar to Animal Fair.

emtzalex

+: Simple discard for benefit that has a neat scaling effect.
-: it could have the potential to overwhelm with options, but Provinces are a standout favoured target to simplify things.
Cost: pure card cost avoids this gaining itself, and the scaling to Silvers/Golds/kingdom Treasures is potentially neat when draw is limited and picking up 3 Coppers won't happen. Good choice.
Overview: simple design that's quite strongly affected by the presence of draw. Province discarding might be such a standout function that this is actually quite narrow and scripted to most players; this either makes it interesting for working out the high skill potential with other targets, or uninteresting. I can't decide myself.

fika monster

+: An extremely cheap cost with a tame effect in engines.
-: terminally pick any card would lend itself to big money over engines, and it might be rather too good at setting up $8 hands by lining Golds and Silvers up.
Cost: it's so cheap that gaining the Heir's Gift itself is the cost, in a way. One can pick up a free double Scheme at the cost of a terminal in the deck. This can be made into a good design premise.
Overview: the on-buy Scheme and the finding any card are two functions this card has, and they are freely available. Put together, I fear money strategies will pick up 4 or 5 Provinces too fast.

Timinou

+: Alt VP with a card cost makes for an alternative way to win: trash cards whilst keeping some green around.
-: Shuffle randomness can decide how buyable this is, so one can get a VP lead purely by chance sometimes, but this is true for a lot of card costs.
Cost: pure card cost means this calls for a strategy involving draw and gaining cards to trash, or picking the odd one up at an opportune time. It can pay for itself, which helps cheapen the cost to just the trashing later on.
Overview: I have a similar idea to this in my own folder of designs, which rewards more VP for having few non-Victories in the deck and costs trashing 3 non-Victories from hand. That idea would benefit from being $* cost to be more buyable. This can get away with just the card cost, I think, so it's a solid design.


Daemon, Humility and Mausoleum would all need to reveal the discarded cards with their costs. I haven't penalised for this, though.

Shortlist: Bone Collector, Bribe, Daemon, Humility, Mausoleum.

Runner-up: Mausoleum by Timinou

Winner: Daemon by mxdata

My choice based entirely on mechanics. Mausoleum is very likeable, but the randomness of when buying one is correct was just enough for me to put it behind the winner. Daemon's cost seems safe and interacts nicely with its on-play effect, so it would seem to be the most consistently well-playing entry.

Awesome!  Funny thing is, I had actually considered this one from the fan mechanics atlas on the last contest I judged. This was a fun contest, because it's such a different kind of cost that it's hard to think about what would be a fair cost. I'll post the next contest soon, as soon as I figure out what the theme should be, probably this weekend
Logged
They/them

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +214
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #23 on: August 03, 2021, 01:10:25 pm »
+1


To clear up Chariot Race: each different card cost counts as a different currency, so they can't be compared. If there are two cards with the same card cost (e.g Campsite and a Smithy with '[ ]: discard two Victories...'), then they tie. I.e., pure card costs never win!


This isn't exactly true, since a pure potion cost will beat a card costing 0 when revealed with chariot race, because $0 P > $0. All cards implicitly have a 0 in any cost not listed.
Logged

grrgrrgrr

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 323
  • Respect: +415
    • View Profile
Re: Fan Mechanics Week #16: We Only Take Card, No Cash
« Reply #24 on: August 08, 2021, 02:12:09 pm »
+1

Is the winner going to host the next contest?
Logged
Pages: [1]
 

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 20 queries.