Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[spineflu]

WDC 139 is:
Design a card that is not an Action, Treasure, or Night card, yet can still be brought into play.

For this contest, we'll work with the de facto rule of the following:

When something instructs you to play a card that's not an action, treasure, or night card, follow the instructions on the card like you would an action, treasure or night card, including when it would be cleaned up (for duration cards).

This may be an on-buy triggered card (like a self-contained innovation+hireling combo), maybe a pure reserve type, maybe a only via reaction does it get played, but it should have a way to get into play, and not be an Action, Treasure, or Night card. If it's solely an on-buy card, it should have some reason for not being an event.

If you need a "null type", or type that the card is when it has no real types, please either use Confusion or make up your own "dead" type; cards like Courtier aren't expecting zero types.

For this contest, I'm not going to rule out/DQ any cards - that was a bummer during contest 131 - but hopefully this gives some clear criteria on what you should be making.

Also for this contest, I'm going to request please no traveller lines, and please minimal fan mechanics. I get that this is easymode if it's a Dawn card or Supplier or something; the spirit of the card should be it gets into play in a weird way, not by following a rulebook, even if it's one you wrote.

[Gubump]

cards like Courtier aren't expecting zero types.

Why couldn't Courtier work with a card with zero types? If I discard no Victory cards with Shepherd, I get +0 Cards. Why would choose zero lead to undefined behavior?

[spineflu]

cards like Courtier aren't expecting zero types.

Why couldn't Courtier work with a card with zero types? If I discard no Victory cards with Shepherd, I get +0 Cards. Why would choose zero lead to undefined behavior?

It's not that it couldn't, it's that it shouldn't. Existing cards have been designed with the assumption of a minimum of one type, typically in range [1..4]. This is a good convention to keep, and making a $5 card dud is one unfun reason for keeping the convention.

But also I bring it up because it has a chance of rearing its head in this contest; if you think I'm off base on this, feel free to design a zero-typed card to prove me wrong. Like I said, I'm not DQing anything this contest.

[exfret]

I agree that it should be fine to have zero types rules wise, but honestly I think it just looks ugly asthetically.

[JW]

Lamb
$3
Reaction - Duration
Now, or at the start of your next turn, +2 Cards.
____
When you gain a card, you may play this from your hand.
 
Comments: It has the fun of Sheepdog with a higher risk of not being able to usefully draw cards on your turn. To compensate, it has an option to delay your draw. Updated to change cost to $3.

[AJL828]

Lamb
$2
Reaction - Duration
Now, or at the start of your next turn, +2 Cards.
____
When you gain a card, you may play this from your hand.
 
Comments: It has the fun of Sheepdog with a higher risk of not being able to usefully draw cards on your turn. To compensate, it has an option to delay your draw. $2 might be too cheap, but it seems a bit weaker than Sheepdog.

I like the idea, but I think $2 is too low for this. The Duration option gives it the same usage as Den of Sin most of the time (minus some buying some events or projects and not gaining to hand).

[mxdata]

WDC 139 is:
Design a card that is not an Action, Treasure, or Night card, yet can still be brought into play.

For this contest, we'll work with the de facto rule of the following:

When something instructs you to play a card that's not an action, treasure, or night card, follow the instructions on the card like you would an action, treasure or night card, including when it would be cleaned up (for duration cards).

This may be an on-buy triggered card (like a self-contained innovation+hireling combo), maybe a pure reserve type, maybe a only via reaction does it get played, but it should have a way to get into play, and not be an Action, Treasure, or Night card. If it's solely an on-buy card, it should have some reason for not being an event.

If you need a "null type", or type that the card is when it has no real types, please either use Confusion or make up your own "dead" type; cards like Courtier aren't expecting zero types.

For this contest, I'm not going to rule out/DQ any cards - that was a bummer during contest 131 - but hopefully this gives some clear criteria on what you should be making.

Also for this contest, I'm going to request please no traveller lines, and please minimal fan mechanics. I get that this is easymode if it's a Dawn card or Supplier or something; the spirit of the card should be it gets into play in a weird way, not by following a rulebook, even if it's one you wrote.

Is a non-Supply card gained by a normal Action card acceptable?

[spineflu]

wdc 139

Is a non-Supply card gained by a normal Action card acceptable?

if the non-supply card can get into play and isn't a action/treasure/night, yes

[Augie279]

Alt-VP with three types thanks dominion card generator for only supporting two currently, all three combining to make a card that's tempting to get early. How much do you want to do that though?

Original version had Basilica's $2 unspent clause. Thought it wasn't worth giving up a Province for what's basically a Fair effect.

[exfret]

EDIT: Retracted from contest for my new version.



Not sure whether it should cost 3 or 4.

[Gubump]

Not sure whether it should cost 3 or 4.

I'd suggest using a different color for this. Using the same color as Actions makes it liable to be misread, since people expect colors to indicate the type(s) a card has. When I first saw this, I was like "wait, Actions don't qualify, why submit this?"

[BBobb]

Not sure whether it should cost 3 or 4.

Isn't this pretty much garbage? Buying the first one is buying a dead card. buying the second one now makes you now have 2 dead cards and 2 horses to negate the bonus of the dead card. Buying a third one will get you 4 Horses and you will have 3 dead cards if you are lucky, which basically means you have just one horse for one deck cycle and 3 Dead cards for the rest. Even getting very, very lucky with this card, I'm not sure I would take them for free if I had the choice.

[emtzalex]

Not sure whether it should cost 3 or 4.

Isn't this pretty much garbage? Buying the first one is buying a dead card. buying the second one now makes you now have 2 dead cards and 2 horses to negate the bonus of the dead card. Buying a third one will get you 4 Horses and you will have 3 dead cards if you are lucky, which basically means you have just one horse for one deck cycle and 3 Dead cards for the rest. Even getting very, very lucky with this card, I'm not sure I would take them for free if I had the choice.

If you time it right, buying the second one gets you 4 Horses (2 from the one you bought, 2 from the one you have), the third one gets you 6 (best case scenario), etc. (with an ever decreasing chance of colliding all of them). It certain compares very unfavorably to Experiment, which gives you the 2 Horse-equivalents without the dead card. While HF gives you the chance to double the number by colliding with the old copy, I feel like that pales in comparison to the downside of getting a dead card in your deck. Especially because (absent a useful combo like Necromancer), Experiment tends to be a purchase of convenience, when you have $3 and a buy to spare and don't want another Silver, often later in the game.

I would suggest making it a pure Duration card that lets you do the gaining now or next turn, then plays a copy as it resolves. I think the text would look like this:

Either now or at the start of your next turn, gain 2 Horses and you may play a Horse Factory from your hand.
When you buy this, play it.

This doubles the chances of colliding them, and increases the possibility of subsequent collisions. And if you do have multiple HFs in hand you can still chain them all. I'm still not sure it's a great card, but I think it is a lot more useful. (If you do make it a Duration, you might want to change the name to something that is thematically more Duration-y, like Horse Ship).

[exfret]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone!

1. I wonder what color it should be then. Is there a standard color for this?

2. Yeah it would be garbage, but you also play the one you buy. That being said, maybe it should be balanced differently, like +3 horses or something similar.

3. I'm wondering if it works well as a sort of hostelry, since I've heard that can form a good amount of draw. That being said, maybe there's some balancing that can be done.

[emtzalex]

My Submission:

A FAR BETTER THING RESERVE Cost: $2 When you buy a card, you may call this, to Exile that card, and to Exile any number copies of it from your hand. When you gain this, put it on your Tavern mat.

My submission is A Far Better Thing. A one-shot pure Reserve card, it goes to your Tavern mat when you gain it, and can be called when you buy a card to send that card (and copies of the card in your hand) into Exile. Once it does, it becomes a dead card in your deck, as there is no way to put it back onto your Tavern mat (unless you return it to the Supply and gain it again).

The card has a somewhat limited use, which is part of the reason why it is priced at $2. The first and most obvious is as a one-shot opportunity to thin your deck. If you have multiple Coppers or Estates in your hand, you can buy one and send them all to Exile.

AFBT's design means this function is immediately available to use, can be used without taking a space in your hand, and does not require a collision with the cards you want to Exile. While his would initially seem to be a rather significant bonus over the Exiling Action cards (and making it compare favorably to Banish), this is advantage is considerably mitigated by the fact that it also junks you with itself, so it thins your deck by one fewer dead card (and, in the case of Coppers, puts a worse card into your deck than one you are getting rid of). But, it also gives you another copy of the card.

The second use (which can go along with the first) is to swap it with a Victory card you buy, then trash AFBT. This allows you to both thin the dead card and still get the VP from the Victory card you gained. This is where the name came from: it is a reference to the final lines in Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities. AFAB stays behind to face execution while the other card "escapes" to the Exile mat.

The final, and most obscure use, would be to synergize with Museum or Fairgrounds, and allow you to add a differently-named card to your pile without adding a useless card to your deck. Similarly, it synergizes with Menagerie, if you swap it for your first Province, Menagerie will distinguish it from a subsequently purchased Province. And finally, AFBT will not trigger Fortune Teller or Bureaucrat.

Because each of these is fairly limited in its benefit, I think a $2 price is balanced. I would appreciate any feedback anyone has.

[mathdude]

I initially wanted to design a pure Spirit card (similar to the 3 in Nocturne, but filling in a missing cost, like $1, $3, or $5), which would then require a Supply card that plays *and* gains it.  The Supply card could also gain the other existing Spirits instead, and thus play them as well/instead.  I feel existing Spirits are quite powerful for their cost, so gaining them easily is not ideal.  And even more so, designing a Spirit that wasn't an Action meant it had to be even more powerful for its cost (since it would sometimes/often miss and then be dead).  This started getting complex, so I switched to a new (similar) type: Spook.

Action, $5
+1 Card, +3 Actions
You may play a Spook card from your hand.
Play any number of Treasures from your hand. You may buy a Spook card.

Spook, $3*
Choose one: +4 Cards; or +$4
Return this to its pile.
(This is not in the Supply)

I considered adding on the Medium that if you buy a Spook, you end your Action Phase and skip your Buy phase, meaning that turn gets a single buy of a Spook and nothing else... hoping that would allow me to turn it back into a Spirit, and have existing Spirits accessible again.  But that makes a Ghost too easy to gain (and the likely choice to buy each time), which is not a good thing.  Maybe I could have designed a $5 Spirit/Spook instead of a $3 one, to compete with Ghost?  Anyway, sticking with Spook (not Spirit) card for now, but leaving the option there that other Spook cards could be designed.

[exfret]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone!

1. I wonder what color it should be then. Is there a standard color for this?

2. Yeah it would be garbage, but you also play the one you buy. That being said, maybe it should be balanced differently, like +3 horses or something similar.

3. I'm wondering if it works well as a sort of hostelry, since I've heard that can form a good amount of draw. That being said, maybe there's some balancing that can be done.

I just playtested it and it can be really crazy. I was gaining 12 horses a turn easily when it went off. It takes some building to collide them, but it's certainly not weak.

[4est]

Here's my entry this week. Ark is a strange one: it's a cheap 2 VP for $3 like Tunnel, but instead of being a dead card in your deck, it immediately goes into play when gained and stays there as a Duration, conveniently out of the way (and in full view of your opponents). But the catch: players can buy an in-play Ark for $6 instead of $3 to steal it for themselves! Stealing an Ark amounts to a 4 VP swing (and thus costs more than Duchy).

One potential challenge (and perhaps a deal breaker for some players) with this card is that in 3+ player games, it is inherently political. Only one player gets stolen from at a time. I think it still could be fun even in multi-player games since it's a relatively small amount VP and stealing can't be a strategy on its own, but hopefully it can still add some more depth to typical Duchy dancing end games.

[Xen3k]

Land Rush - $4
Reaction
+1 Buy
Play any number of Victory cards from your hand.
+$2 per Victory card played.
----
When you gain a Victory card, you may play this from your hand.

A pure reaction that rewards you for having a bunch of Victory cards. The trigger to play it is to buy a Victory card, so it reinforces itself. It can have some interesting interactions with other Victory cards. I am not sure if the Price is right at $4, but I can see this being a very strong card to pick up late game right before greening. Feedback is appreciated.

[spineflu]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone!

1. I wonder what color it should be then. Is there a standard color for this?

Maybe just use the Shelters color? There isn't a single-color thing in red yet.

[exfret]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone!

1. I wonder what color it should be then. Is there a standard color for this?

Maybe just use the Shelters color? There isn't a single-color thing in red yet.

Sounds like a good idea! Especially since, except for necropolis, the shelters are essentially "do-nothing" types.

[BBobb]

Thanks for the great feedback everyone!

1. I wonder what color it should be then. Is there a standard color for this?

2. Yeah it would be garbage, but you also play the one you buy. That being said, maybe it should be balanced differently, like +3 horses or something similar.

3. I'm wondering if it works well as a sort of hostelry, since I've heard that can form a good amount of draw. That being said, maybe there's some balancing that can be done.

Ah, I missed that you play it when you buy it. that makes the card much more playable, though I still think it is probably a bit weak.

[exfret]

EDIT: Retracted for version three in a later post!

Here is my updated Horse Factory.

[exfret]

Here is my updated Horse Factory.

Some comments/clarifications on this new version:

• It's less swingy since as a duration it has a higher chance of finding another Horse Factory. Also, I like it being a duration since I can color it all orange instead of having to find some special color.
• Returning to the Supply is mandatory if you played at least one Horse Factory with the first.
• If you want to get rid of a lot of your Horse Factories, you can just gain one, use it to play another which plays another etc. Alternatively, you could just not play any, stockpile Horse Factories, then start buying and returning just the one you bought for massive stonks amounts of Horses. This is actually a really good strategy if you're able to kick it off with some other draw or sifting and get a few of these in your hand and if you have the economy for an extra 4 cost buy each turn (I playtested doing this with some people from the discord and it was pretty good).
• Changed to on gain rather than on buy because why not.
• The return to supply is there so that it's more unlikely for the pile to run out and end you up with a bunch of dead cards. It's still possible for your opponent to screw you over by buying the last couple if you depleted the pile though, so be careful.

[arowdok]

Futures
$4
Duration - Reserve
When you gain a Victory card, you may call this. At the start of your next turn, return this to the Supply, +1 Buy and +$4.
-
When you gain this, put this on your Tavern mat.

I am unsure if this should be Duration-Reserve or Reserve-Duration so went with older to newer sort.