Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!  (Read 5489 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mandioca15

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 160
  • Respect: +221
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #50 on: August 07, 2021, 12:06:17 pm »
+3

Pendant (Treasure-Attack, $5)

+$2
+1 Buy

Each other player takes Thwarted.

------
Thwarted (State)

At the start of your turn, return this and reveal your hand. If you have any non-Victory cards costing $3 or more, you may discard one of them. If you didn't discard a card, trash a card from your hand.

An Attack that doesn't stack and might be helpful early on, but gets stronger as the game continues.
Logged

MochaMoko

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Shuffle iT Username: MochaMoko
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #51 on: August 08, 2021, 10:03:27 pm »
+7

It's around the halfway mark into the week! I made a list of the currently submitted cards. I hope I got the descriptions accurate; this is how I'm interpreting the cards. If I got anything wrong, be it names or costs or card effects, or if I missed someone, please let me know via message or something.

Keep it up with the designing! I'll make another post like this a little bit before the deadline.

18 submissions:
Gubump: Collector ⑥ (gives all 3 vanilla bonus token-cards, removes one from everyone else or Curses them)
JW: Forest Witch ⑤ (Patron +Buy, gives Curses after it’s played enough times this game)
NoMoreFun: Hostile Village ⑤ (Village that targeted-discard-attacks a copy of the next card you play)
faust: Raiding Village ④ (Village+Militia attack+they gain a Horse)
xyz123: Guard ⑤ (Peddler that has everyone else draw to 5 and discard to 3)
majiponi: Interest ⑤ (Silver+ Knight attack for Treasures (their choice) + may gain/play a trashed Treasure)
spineflu: Pearl ⑤ (Silver+ flip flops between +Buy and Hex you choose from Famine, Fear, Haunting; only one copy of Hex per turn)
segura: Priestess ③P (Cantrip that gives Boon on odd (any) cards-in-play and Hex otherwise)
X-tra: Sickos ⑤ (Non-terminal stop, replaces a card in hand (discarded) with Silver (gained), Curses)
Aquila: Appanage ⑤ (Silver+ Gold cost-reduction; target-discards a single* Treasure costing less than Appanage)
AJL828: Djinn ⑤ (Caravan, until then Curses on other players buying a copy of a card they have in play)
Timinou: Philanthropist ③ / Benefaction ⑤ (Cantrip, gives Copper to everyone's hands; Cleanup ability one-shot to gain a card costing up to ① per Copper you have in play) / (Silver+ Cleanup ability trashes up to 2 Coppers from play)
emtzalex: Huckster Village ⑤ (Village that turns Conclave* if an opponent replaces card in hand (discarded) with Copper (gained); junking prevented by revealing Copper)
4est: Prisoner ⑤ (Night card that delays Action or Treasure from hand; until then discard-1 attacks anyone else who plays a copy)
Gardoomalion: Witch’s Hat ⑤ (Cantrip that junks based off of the cost of the card it plays: the cheaper, the harsher*)
Xen3k: Kudzu ③ (Non-terminal one-shot stop that gives the player -① token, and whittles others’ Coffers or spreads copies of itself; it’s a penalty gained for not overpaying ① for +1 Coffers when buying a card)
pubby: Charity House ③ (Cantrip* that sifts Treasures; discard attacks players with >⑩ card cost total in hand)
mandioca: Pendant ⑤ (Silver+ Buy; gives others State that at start of turn may discard a non-Victory card costing >③; or trash a card from hand)
« Last Edit: August 09, 2021, 10:52:48 am by MochaMoko »
Logged

grep

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 260
  • Respect: +356
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #52 on: August 08, 2021, 10:18:39 pm »
+1


Inquisition
$5 - Action - Attack
+2 Cards
Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a card.
The player to your left names a card. You may play an Action card from your hand other than the named card.

Conditional cantrip (the opponent can try to evade it naming a card that would break the chain)
Logged

Gubump

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1236
  • Respect: +1057
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #53 on: August 08, 2021, 10:24:26 pm »
0

Gubump: Collector ⑤ (gives all 3 vanilla bonus token-cards, takes one from everyone else or Curses them)

Just a clarification, Collector doesn't steal tokens/cards, it just makes people lose them (you probably realized this, I'm just clarifying because of the word "takes"). Also, it costs , not .


Inquisition
$5 - Action - Attack
+2 Cards
Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a card.
The player to your left names a card. You may play an Action card from your hand other than the named card.

Conditional cantrip (the opponent can try to evade it naming a card that would break the chain)

This is a conditional Lab, not a conditional Cantrip.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2021, 10:27:18 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.

faust

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3041
  • Shuffle iT Username: faust
  • Respect: +4304
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #54 on: August 09, 2021, 02:39:57 am »
0

This is a conditional Lab, not a conditional Cantrip.
I'm not sure by what definition a Lab wouldn't also be a cantrip.
Logged
The quiet comprehending of the ending of it all

Gubump

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1236
  • Respect: +1057
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #55 on: August 09, 2021, 04:16:52 am »
+1

This is a conditional Lab, not a conditional Cantrip.
I'm not sure by what definition a Lab wouldn't also be a cantrip.

I guess it depends on your definition of Cantrip, but it also just seems weird to me to understate it as a mere conditional Cantrip vs a conditional Lab.
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.

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1266
  • Respect: +768
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #56 on: August 09, 2021, 02:02:00 pm »
+1


Inquisition
$5 - Action - Attack
+2 Cards
Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a card.
The player to your left names a card. You may play an Action card from your hand other than the named card.

Conditional cantrip (the opponent can try to evade it naming a card that would break the chain)
I really like the Counterfeit like mechanic to nerf a Lab but fear that the Attack is too good.
Logged

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1266
  • Respect: +768
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #57 on: August 09, 2021, 04:24:41 pm »
0

This is a conditional Lab, not a conditional Cantrip.
I'm not sure by what definition a Lab wouldn't also be a cantrip.

I guess it depends on your definition of Cantrip, but it also just seems weird to me to understate it as a mere conditional Cantrip vs a conditional Lab.
Yeah. Cantrip implies that the card does not net draw whereas this card always does. So you could label it as conditionally non-terminal draw.
Logged

Timinou

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 444
  • Respect: +543
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #58 on: August 10, 2021, 09:03:31 am »
+1


Inquisition
$5 - Action - Attack
+2 Cards
Each other player with 4 or more cards discards a card.
The player to your left names a card. You may play an Action card from your hand other than the named card.

Conditional cantrip (the opponent can try to evade it naming a card that would break the chain)

Minor nitpick, but I think it should say "Each other player with 4 or more cards in hand discards a card".

It might be a departure from what you envisioned for the card (and maybe wouldn't fit with the contest rules), but I think it would be interesting to make the handsize attack conditional on whether or not you play another Action card. 
« Last Edit: August 10, 2021, 09:12:57 am by Timinou »
Logged

fika monster

  • Conspirator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 245
  • Respect: +201
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #59 on: August 10, 2021, 10:29:43 am »
+2

Pissprophet!
Logged

alion8me

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 139
  • Shuffle iT Username: alion8me
  • Respect: +176
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #60 on: August 11, 2021, 08:58:07 pm »
+1



Quote
Magister

At the start of your next turn, +1 Card and +$1.
Until then, after the first time each other player plays a non-Duration card costing $1 or more that they already have a copy of in play on their turn, they trash it.

Night - Duration - Attack
$5

Ty to the people on discord that helped tighten up the wording.

edit: another wording fix
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 12:35:40 am by alion8me »
Logged

MochaMoko

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Shuffle iT Username: MochaMoko
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #61 on: August 12, 2021, 12:11:16 am »
0

Alright, I didn't realize that it's been a week already. Sorry for the wait, everyone! I promised there would be 24 hours after the 24-hour warning.

You have 24 hours left!

If you would like to edit your submission, please include an edit: label so I can easily find the changes.

3 new submissions so far:
grep: Inquisition ⑤ (conditionally non-terminal draw; discards 1 card for players with 4 or more cards in hand)
fika monster: Pissprophet ⑤ (non-terminal draw; gives everyone Copper to hand)
alion8me: Magister ⑤ (Night-Duration delayed Peddler; until then, trashes the first card each other player plays that they have a copy of in play)

This brings the total to 21 submissions.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 12:28:22 am by MochaMoko »
Logged

The Alchemist

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 175
  • Respect: +200
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #62 on: August 12, 2021, 12:32:29 am »
0



Abductors: Torturer but between half militia and a -1 action token attack. They can take the -1 action token as much as they want, so taking it once is a defense to all future attacks by abductors. The fact that Abductors is a necro ensures that every kingdom with this attack has at least one village. 

Rules for -1 Action token: A player with this returns the token the next time they receive a +1 Action, and ignores that action. Because the Action given at the start of the turn is not a +Action, it is unaffected. At the end of a player's action phase, they may also spend an action to return the -1 Action token as well (so playing no actions on your turn returns the token).

Considerations: As now, one can choose to discard twice (down to 3) instead of taking the action token. An old version allowed discarding down to 2. I am unsure if this new version is therefor too generous, as the choice to discard instead may be too favorable over the token, but maybe that's okay.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 12:39:04 am by The Alchemist »
Logged

lompeluiten

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #63 on: August 12, 2021, 05:53:23 am »
0

at the end still some inspiration:

New wording
Hooligans $3
Action - Attack
+1 action
+1 attack
Each opponent shows their hand, then discards one of their highest costed cards in $. Then they draw an card
+1$ if an card costing $5 or more is discarded this way.


Old wording

Hooligans $3
+1 action
+1 card
Every opponent shows their hand and then discard their highest cost card, then draws an card.
+1$ if an card that cost 5 or more is discarded.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 06:24:13 pm by lompeluiten »
Logged

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1266
  • Respect: +768
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #64 on: August 12, 2021, 06:31:38 am »
0

This looks slightly too good. It can easily lead to degenerate, stalemate like openings (nobody can get any purchases but Hooligans into play).
I like the conditional Pendler aspect of the card though, that looks quite fun and quite interactive. But it could also be too centralizing (the card does after all partially defend against itself, you want lots of them such that the likelihood of the Attacker getting a Peddler is smaller).
Logged

majiponi

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 684
  • Respect: +593
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #65 on: August 12, 2021, 10:01:14 am »
0

at the end still some inspiration:

Hooligans $3
+1 action
+1 card
Every opponent shows their hand and then discard their highest cost card, then draws an card.
+1$ if an card that cost 5 or more is discarded.

I have a Scrying Pool, a Fortune, a Colony in hand. Which is the most expensive card?
Logged

lompeluiten

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #66 on: August 12, 2021, 10:27:15 am »
0

at the end still some inspiration:

Hooligans $3
+1 action
+1 card
Every opponent shows their hand and then discard their highest cost card, then draws an card.
+1$ if an card that cost 5 or more is discarded.
I have a Scrying Pool, a Fortune, a Colony in hand. Which is the most expensive card?
"
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Potion
"P is orthogonal to $ in a cost; thus, although a card with a cost of $XP is considered to cost "more" than a card costing $x or less with no P, costs of, e.g., $4 and $3P are incomparable—neither is more or less than the other. Many trash-for-benefit cards whose effects depend on a card's cost only consider the cost in $ and ignore P; most Workshop variants can't gain cards with P costs at all."
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Debt
"A cost in D is orthogonal to a cost in a $; cards with D in their cost do not cost less or more than cards with a $ cost. D and P are similarly not comparable."

In "Highest cost" the alternative payment methods are not taken into considiration. That should also be true for this card.
So the Colony
Logged

lompeluiten

  • Navigator
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 79
  • Respect: +45
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #67 on: August 12, 2021, 10:53:42 am »
0

This looks slightly too good. It can easily lead to degenerate, stalemate like openings (nobody can get any purchases but Hooligans into play).
I like the conditional Pendler aspect of the card though, that looks quite fun and quite interactive. But it could also be too centralizing (the card does after all partially defend against itself, you want lots of them such that the likelihood of the Attacker getting a Peddler is smaller).
It is quite an risky opener. The first time you play it, it often take out the card they just bought, but also an estate they get to draw an better card for it. And even if you did, you are not advancing your game plan, while your opponents still do.
Logged

spineflu

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1191
  • Shuffle iT Username: spineflu
  • Head Empty, Heart Worms, Can't Lose
  • Respect: +1001
    • View Profile
    • my instagram, where i paint things
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #68 on: August 12, 2021, 11:26:09 am »
+1

at the end still some inspiration:

Hooligans $3
+1 action
+1 card
Every opponent shows their hand and then discard their highest cost card, then draws an card.
+1$ if an card that cost 5 or more is discarded.
I have a Scrying Pool, a Fortune, a Colony in hand. Which is the most expensive card?
"
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Potion
"P is orthogonal to $ in a cost; thus, although a card with a cost of $XP is considered to cost "more" than a card costing $x or less with no P, costs of, e.g., $4 and $3P are incomparable—neither is more or less than the other. Many trash-for-benefit cards whose effects depend on a card's cost only consider the cost in $ and ignore P; most Workshop variants can't gain cards with P costs at all."
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Debt
"A cost in D is orthogonal to a cost in a $; cards with D in their cost do not cost less or more than cards with a $ cost. D and P are similarly not comparable."

In "Highest cost" the alternative payment methods are not taken into considiration. That should also be true for this card.
So the Colony
might wanna clarify highest cost in coins then, borrowing that wording from Forge
Logged

Gubump

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1236
  • Respect: +1057
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #69 on: August 12, 2021, 12:51:41 pm »
0

at the end still some inspiration:

Hooligans $3
+1 action
+1 card
Every opponent shows their hand and then discard their highest cost card, then draws an card.
+1$ if an card that cost 5 or more is discarded.
I have a Scrying Pool, a Fortune, a Colony in hand. Which is the most expensive card?
"
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Potion
"P is orthogonal to $ in a cost; thus, although a card with a cost of $XP is considered to cost "more" than a card costing $x or less with no P, costs of, e.g., $4 and $3P are incomparable—neither is more or less than the other. Many trash-for-benefit cards whose effects depend on a card's cost only consider the cost in $ and ignore P; most Workshop variants can't gain cards with P costs at all."
http://wiki.dominionstrategy.com/index.php/Debt
"A cost in D is orthogonal to a cost in a $; cards with D in their cost do not cost less or more than cards with a $ cost. D and P are similarly not comparable."

In "Highest cost" the alternative payment methods are not taken into considiration. That should also be true for this card.
So the Colony

Except your card doesn't say "highest cost in ," it just says "highest cost." Highest cost between Colony, Scrying Pool, and Fortune is undefined, because as what you quoted says, those 3 costs cannot be compared.
« Last Edit: August 12, 2021, 12:53:53 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.

segura

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1266
  • Respect: +768
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #70 on: August 12, 2021, 03:23:33 pm »
+2

This looks slightly too good. It can easily lead to degenerate, stalemate like openings (nobody can get any purchases but Hooligans into play).
I like the conditional Pendler aspect of the card though, that looks quite fun and quite interactive. But it could also be too centralizing (the card does after all partially defend against itself, you want lots of them such that the likelihood of the Attacker getting a Peddler is smaller).
It is quite an risky opener. The first time you play it, it often take out the card they just bought, but also an estate they get to draw an better card for it. And even if you did, you are not advancing your game plan, while your opponents still do.
Ehm, nope. You play your best card, they discard their best card. If it is a $5, due to a 5/2 opening, you even get more.
I am not claiming that this will always and automatically happen. But such degenerate openings are likely to occur in some Kingdoms.
Logged

Timinou

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 444
  • Respect: +543
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #71 on: August 12, 2021, 10:21:19 pm »
0

I made a revision to my entry to revise the cost of Philanthropist from $3 to $4:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=20870.msg874543#msg874543
Logged

mathdude

  • Golem
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 187
  • Respect: +177
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #72 on: August 12, 2021, 11:33:38 pm »
0

Warlock
Action-Attack, $5

If this is the only Warlock you have in play, +1 Cards, +2 Actions, each other player reveals the top card of their deck and discards it or puts it back (your choice). Otherwise, +3 Cards, each other player gains a Curse.


I wanted a card that gave delayed Curses... ended up by happening only if you match 2 in a turn. I started the first play as a Lost City, no attack. But it felt weird playing an Attack card that didn't attack. So I changed it to a Village with a simple sifting attack, ruining any topdeck setup. This is now wordier and has 2 distinct attacks, but I think it's still okay.

The wording does intentionally let you get the Village/sifting attack multiple times with Throne variants (which was more powerful when it was a Lost City).

As it stands, it's a decent engine starter/enabler with the ability to run multiple attacks. But it can't run a full engine on its own, and needs another village for support. Otherwise, you're limited to 3 Warlocks... a Village and 2 Smithy with cursing attacks.
Logged
he/him

MochaMoko

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Shuffle iT Username: MochaMoko
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #73 on: August 13, 2021, 12:15:02 am »
+2

Submissions are closed! Expect results within 6 hours.
Logged

MochaMoko

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 41
  • Shuffle iT Username: MochaMoko
  • Respect: +87
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #124: Yes… ha ha ha… YES!
« Reply #74 on: August 13, 2021, 04:43:08 am »
+7

Alrighty! It’s judgment time!
I’m going to have each of your card texts and then my feedback. If the card text differs, please take it as my suggestion on wording.

Quote
Gubump: Collector
⑥ Action - Attack
+1 Villager
+1 Coffers

Gain a Horse.
Each other player may remove
a token from their Coffers or
Villagers, or discard a Horse. If
they don’t, they gain a Curse.

It’s a super Baker* on-play, and the attack is pretty rough (the Coffers attack is the least painful imo, but it’s still a hit). I’m worried that I’ll spike ⑥, get a stockpile of Coffers or something, and then just start handing out Curses to other players, making it harder for themselves to hit ⑥ to even get started on Attacking. In my opinion, it’s a bit too snowbally. Oh wait, lots of Attacks are like that. Well... I can’t fault you too much for it.

Quote
JW: Forest Witch
⑤ Action - Attack

+1 Villager
+1 Buy
+➁

Remove a Coin token from the
Forest Witch pile. If you can’t,
each other player gains a Curse.
-
Setup: Put 3 Coin tokens per
player on the Forest Witch pile.

Uses coin tokens in a cute way. The vanilla portion is pretty nice to have, which is good, or else this thing wouldn’t be gotten much. The delayed aspect of the Cursing makes it significantly less painful, and also since the top half of the card is payload, it probably won’t be prioritized early anyways (though right, the Villager is nice). I like it. I wish there were a way to word it nicely and have the text fit better.

Quote
NoMoreFun: Hostile Village
⑤ Action - Attack
+1 Card
+2 Actions

The next time you play a
card this turn, each other
player with 5 or more cards in
hand discards  a copy of it
(or reveals they can’t).

Targeted attacks!! Well, the top is just a Village. But boy oh boy, killing turns? mwahaha. If Hostile Village is the only Village on board, well, I sure hope there’s also some non-terminal draw around (so I don’t have to have this in hand to kick off my turn). I think this attack is pretty brutal. If the Attack misses, you get to see their hand and maybe plan something more nefarious with another Hostile Village. I don’t think it’s necessarily bad design, but I’m scared of it.

Quote
faust: Raiding Village
④ Action - Attack
+1 Card
+2 Actions

Each other player discards
down to 3 cards in hand and
gains a Horse.

More Villages! I think this gives out too many Horses. For example, if 10 of these (distributed across the players, assumedly) are played in a single shuffle in a 4-player game, that’s 30 Horses distributed out. That’s an extreme case, but yeah. I’d only give a Horse to players who discarded any cards. Yes I know that gets rid of the whole thing with this turning terrible after too many plays, and maybe it ends up too powerful. But I mean Horses are good.

Quote
xyz123: Guard
⑤ Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
+①

Each other player draws until
they have 5 cards in hand and
then discards down to 3.

This was discussed in the thread with the Throne variant, but even as this, I think the amount of drawing is way too much. Someone compared it to Margrave, and I think even that one’s annoying. This is a cantrip, so it can just happen whenever through your turn, and then everyone else has to draw and think about more cards. Worst case (which I fear will be much too common) is that someone has to shuffle in the middle of your turn. Multiple times. I hate Minion. I’m not sure how to salvage this idea, but I think this attack probably can’t go on a non-terminal card, especially not a cantrip like this one.


Quote
majiponi: Interest
⑤ Treasure - Attack
+➁

Each other player reveals the
top 2 cards of their deck, trashes
a revealed Treasure, and discards
the rest. You may gain a trashed
Treasure. If you did, play it.

This card on the board will make me loath to use Treasures as primary payload. Oh wait, Interest is also a Treasure. I don’t like it. If the board demands use of Treasures, this just destroys things, and then they destroy each other and chain, much to the dismay of whoever has the ill fortune to have their Interest trashed and used against them. The good thing is that there’s a lot more payload than Treasures these days.

Quote
spineflu: Pearl
⑤ Treasure - Attack - Doom
+➁

If you have an odd number of Pearls
in play, +1 Buy. Otherwise, choose
a face up Hex, turning it face down
for the turn. Each other player
receives the Hex you chose.
-
Setup: Set aside the Famine, Fear, and
Haunting Hexes, face up.

Well, this looks similar to Idol. It also looks similar to Relic. I expect the regular order of the Hexes will go Haunting, Fear, and Famine. The thing is, going through all that would require uh a lot of Pearls to be played. (Yes maybe you’ll play it for Famine if other players already Haunting/Feared some other players). Though the usage of Hexes this way is cute, I think there must be a way to cut down on the complexity/text length. I also dearly hope that Famine won’t be played too much, because that would be a lot of shuffling.

Quote
segura: Priestess
③P Action - Attack - Fate - Doom
+1 Card
+1 Action

If you have an odd number of
cards in play, receive a Boon.
Otherwise, each other player
receives the next Hex.

Potion cost! I’ll give you some credit for slowing down the acquisition of this by making this cost Potion, but I think this card can’t exist. Cantrip Booning and Hexing means that there will potentially be a lot of Boons and Hexes thrown about. Well besides for the fact that it’s probably just skippable unless I already have Potion around, or I really need to attack my opponents. The thing about cantrip Boon is that I don’t know what I’m going to get (and if I want it for a specific Boon, well that’s not happening very often.) So if I get this, I feel like I’m more looking for some random Hexing.

Quote
X-tra: Sickos
⑤ Action - Attack
+1 Action

Discard a card.
Gain a Silver to your hand.
Each other player gains a Curse.

Unconditional Cursing, here we go! This is a simple card. It just slows down everyone’s decks. The Silver is probably good if we’re just slogging it out. I think it snowballs less quickly than most cards of this kind, mainly because it slows down your deck as well. I like its simplicity.

Quote
Aquila: Appanage
⑤ Treasure - Attack

Gold costs ① less this turn.
Each other player with 5 or more cards
in hand discards a Treasure costing
less than this (or reveals they can’t).

The attack is cute, but it probably hits Copper most of the time. I probably want this card when I just want a deck full of Treasures. Most of the time, I’m not worried about this Attack much at all. I feel like there’s something interesting going on here, but it doesn’t seem to be coming together as an exciting card to me.

Quote
AJL828: Djinn
⑤ Action - Duration - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action

At the start of your next turn,
+1 Card. Until then, when another
player buys a card they have a
copy of in play, they gain a Curse.

Caravan woo! I don’t know how to evaluate this card. Caravan that Curses sounds pretty strong for ⑤; of course this has a condition. This seems stronger than Swamp Hag at first glance, mainly because it’s draw too. And so I feel like it’ll just force Curses down people’s throats. I mean that’s what a Curser does, so...

Quote
Timinou: Philanthropist / Benefaction
④ Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action

Each player gains a Copper to
their hand. At the start of
Clean-up, you may trash this
to gain a card costing up to ①
per Copper you have in play.

⑤ Treasure

At the start of Clean-up,
trash up to 2 Coppers
you have in play.

Philanthropist seems like a strong-ish card to me, but I can’t tell. Copper to hand is a funny thing. Well first of all, this junks everyone. Second of all, this gives people free money, which could be important for hitting some important price points. Okay they have to live with or get rid of an additional Copper. Depending on the board, well, yeah, that’s pretty harsh. But don’t forget you also have to junk yourself, so…

Well hey, would you look at it, there’s Copper trashing with Benefaction! Unsure how often it will get uncovered, but Philanthropist conveniently has a thing that trashes itself, so it promotes getting more, potentially. And like dude if we’re drawing somehow, this thing can gain Provinces or Colonies. Probably will pop it before drawing deck though. I don’t know how to evaluate this pile. But it looks well thought out! Props!

Quote
emtzalex: Huckster Village
⑤ Action - Attack
+2 Actions

Each other player may reveal a
Copper from their hand. If they
don’t, they discard a card and
gain a Copper to their hand.
If any player gained a Copper,
+➁. Otherwise, +1 Card.

Huckster Village is a funny one. I feel like the junking attack really won’t occur very often until late when it might even help the opponent, unless we have very strong trashing. And then, well, it gives Coppers. Which makes it easier for the Attack to be blocked. My hunch is that it’s a weak card, but hey, it does Village things. I wonder if it could be fine at ④. Like, if you get it early, it’s just a Vanillage, basically, anyways.

Quote
4est: Prisoner
⑤ Night - Duration - Attack

You may set aside an Action
or Treasure from your hand
face up (on this). At the start
of your next turn, play it.
Until then, when another
player plays a copy of it,
they first discard a card.

Scary scary. The penalty that this brings for cards that you want to play a lot of is pretty big. Well it’s kind of hilarious with DtX. But otherwise, man this can just destroy turns, especially if multiple people are using Prisoner. That being said, Prisoner’s effect of delaying an Action or Treasure seems like a pretty weak non-Attack effect. You also have to forgo playing an Action that you presumably wanted to play. Delaying Coppers sounds scary when people haven’t gotten nice deck control yet. Like NoMoreFun’s Hostile Village, my reaction is that I don’t think it’s necessarily forbidden Attack territory (given the conditionality of the discard Attack), but I’m very scared of it.


Quote
Gardoomalion: Witch’s Hat
⑤ Action - Attack - Looter
+1 Card

You may play an Action card
from your hand. Each other
player gains, if the card you
played cost…
from ⓪ to ➁: a Curse.
from +➁ to ④: a Ruins.
⑤+: a Ruins to their hand.

Cantrip junker! I think it’s cute that it gives out cheap Actions that can be used to Curse players. Not that I’d want to spend the Action on playing a Ruins, usually. The fact that it needs to play an Action to junk makes it a bit more possible to exist in my opinion. I’m not enthused that this can distribute 2 piles of junk cards, though.

Quote
Xen3k: Kudzu
③ Action - Attack
+1 Action

Return this to the Supply.
Take your -① token. If you did, each
other player removes a token from
their Coffers. If they can’t, they gain a Kudzu.
-
In games using this, when you buy a card,
you may pay for +1 Coffers.
If you don’t, gain a Kudzu.

This has got to be the funkiest entry this week.
It seems to slow down games significantly. Well, Coffers are good though! The existence of this will probably help with spiking. However, without proper care, you’ll get grown over by not overpaying and getting junked by others. the -① token means that it’ll get pretty tough to overpay for things afterwards, which is concerning. It could keep spiraling towards sadness. I’m glad there are only 10 of these now. Props for originality. It is a really weird card.


Quote
pubby: Charity House
③ Action - Attack
+1 Action

You may discard a Treasure
for +2 Cards.
Each other player may reveal
a hand with a total cost in
of or less. If they don’t,
they discard a card.

I think the non-Attack effect is decent. Of course, if something tragic like Stables happens, you’re out of luck. I expect that the Attack will start doing something around turn 7 or something. It seems like it can get pretty harsh. 2-card hands do not seem too out of the picture. I wonder if that means this might want to be bumped up to ④ or something at least. Though again, the attack doesn’t work early on, so that price difference doesn’t really matter that much.

The card is definitely flavorful. It might start getting annoying in multiplayer, where you’re more likely to be attacked more often. Actually, a hand that hits Province with basic Treasures will be destroyed. So money probably takes a big hit with this card around, though it takes a big hit with many cards.

Quote
mandioca: Pendant
⑤ Treasure - Attack

+1 Buy

Each other player takes Thwarted.

State: Thwarted
At the start of your turn, return this, and you may
discard a non-Victory card costing or more.
If you don’t, trash a card from your hand.

I am getting tired. Sorry, it’s been a long week.
I feel like Thwarted is probably not going to be strong often. Later on, it trips on Provinces/Duchies. Earlier on, it helps trash. In the middle, it has the most potential, but I think odds are, there’s still stuff I might want to trash. And then it’s just me discarding a Silver or a Gold or something. That being said, hey, who doesn’t like +Buy.

Quote
grep: Inquisition
⑤ Action - Attack
+2 Cards

Each other player with 4 or more
cards in hand discards a card.
The player to your left names a
card. You may play an Action card
from your hand other than the
named card.

The Advisor-esque disabling is kind of cute. This definitely needs a bit of support to work as non-terminal draw. I expect the Attack to more or less turn into Militia, but not doing that immediately (unless you get attacked by two opponents early) is nice. It’s probably well-priced and well-balanced.

Quote
fika monster: Pissprophet
⑤ Action - Attack
+2 Cards
+1 Action

Every player gains a
Copper to their hand.

This Attack is pretty annoying with discard attacks. Otherwise, hey, it’s draw, and hey it throws Copper all over the place. I would expect that this is weaker than Laboratory; could be wrong. I’m not too concerned about everyone having a deck full of brown, but maybe I should be. Copper isn’t the worst thing for someone to have you gain to hand. Like I said earlier, it can help with price points and such, and even just having a larger hand size can help with things. The junking with Copper might be a net negative for the player of Pissprophet, considering everyone gets junked. But this is still non-terminal draw, one of the best types of non-terminal cards to put in a deck. So it’s probably not so weak.

Quote
alion8me: Magister
⑤ Night - Duration - Attack

At the start of your next turn,
+1 Card and +①.
Until then, after the first time
another player plays a
non-Duration card on their turn
costing or more that they
already have a copy of in play,
they trash it.

Trashing attack! The way this Attack is timed, it’s likely you trash a non-terminal Action or a Village. Which is a pretty tough choice unless you have some dummy non-terminal Actions (preferably cheap cantrips) in your deck that you can count on farming. If the Attack doesn’t go anywhere, this card looks very sad, on par with Caravan Guard. I think most of the time, the Attack will be something significant though. I think it’s a fine design. I’m glad that it doesn’t stack.

Quote
The Alchemist: Abductors
④ Action - Attack
+2 Actions

Each other player with 4 or
more cards in hand either
discards a card, or takes their
-1 Action token, their choice.
(They may pick an option
they can’t do.)

Necropolis? T_T I think the option besides for the -1 Action token has been toned down too much. I’d expect to just discard to 3 cards in hand most of the time; it’s less likely to kill my turn. Well if I have no Actions, I’m happy to take the -1 Action token. So that option just makes the Attack pretty weak in my opinion. And then well the bonus is so sad. Like others have said, the -1 Action token is a real toughie to make work imo. I’d love to see a card that uses it that I can say “Yes, this is the one!” to, but I don’t have high hopes for finding that card.

Quote
lompeluiten: Hooligans
③ Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player reveals their
hand, discards a card with
the highest cost in out of
the revealed cards, and then
draws a card.
If a card costing or more is
discarded this way, +①.

It’s a cantrip Attack that likely turns into a Peddler later on. I feel like it makes a bit more sense for it to Peddler when it’s discarding cheap cards. In that case, it might only activate in the beginning of the game, though.
I think the Attack is brutal/swingy without deck control. That includes the beginning of the game. If it skips over an important trasher, it will just slow the opponent down so much. I don’t like that.

Quote
mathdude: Warlock
⑤ Action - Attack

If you have no other Warlocks in
play, +1 Card and +2 Actions,
and each other player reveals the
top card of their deck and discards
it or puts it back, your choice.
Otherwise, +3 Cards, and each
other player gains a Curse.

This is a curious one. Of course +3 Cards and Curse is crazy strong. But buying a Village for ⑤ isn’t really something you’d want to do. Oh right there’s the Spy attack. I don’t like that. I would have liked this card without the Spy attack, but unfortunately that wouldn’t really fit the criteria of this week’s prompt. The good thing is that the Spy attack will only happen once per turn (usually). Maybe I’m fine with it then, to be honest. The delayed Cursing is nice in my opinion (because it’s slightly less snowbally). This seems to be a common trait in the Cursers that I like from this week.

Runner-ups:
JW’s Forest Witch
X-tra’s Sickos
Xen3k’s Kudzu
grep’s Inquisition
mathdude’s Warlock

Winner: Timinou's Philanthropist / Benefaction
« Last Edit: August 13, 2021, 04:59:22 am by MochaMoko »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4  All
 

Page created in 0.109 seconds with 22 queries.