Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 3 ... 48 [All]

Author Topic: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)  (Read 167076 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« on: March 31, 2012, 07:17:31 pm »
+67

Over four years in the making (so far), here is the current form of my Enterprise expansion. It is designed to be a 300-card set, containing 25 Kingdom cards and at least one ancillary card. Right now it's in a bit of a state of flux, since I haven't gotten as much testing it as I would like to. This is what it looks like now, though, for some values of "now".

Its main theme is "effects with limited uses". This means there are a few one-shots and a few optional one-shots (à la Mining Village). The set also introduces Trade tokens, which you usually get when you gain a card and can use to boost that card when you play it. There are a few other cards that approach the concept of a one-shot in a creative way. Finally, there's a Treasures subtheme and a few off-theme cards.

The number of stars after each card name indicates how much testing the card has gotten. More black stars = more testing. Generally if a card has a bunch of stars, I'm happy with it or I would have scrapped it by now. Cards with more white stars need much more testing before I can make a judgment.

Kingdom Cards


Quote
Redistrict: Action, $0  ★★★☆☆
Choose a card in your hand. Trash it and gain a card costing exactly $1 more than it. You may trash this. If you do, gain a card costing exactly $2 more than the chosen card.


Quote
Auction: Treasure–Reaction, $2  ★★★☆☆
+1 Buy
When you play this, discard your hand. Worth $1 per card discarded.

When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this and another Treasure, to gain a Gold.


Quote
Jubilee: Action, $2  ★★★★☆
+2 Actions
+$2
You may pay a Trade token. If you don't, set this aside, and return it to the Supply at the start of Clean-up.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.


Quote
Wanderer: Action, $2  ★★☆☆☆
+4 Cards
The player to your left gains this.

When you buy this, put your deck into your discard pile.


Quote
Charlatan: Action–Attack–Duration, $3  ★★☆☆☆
+1 Action
Now and at the start of your next turn, +$1. Until your next turn, each other player must use all of their Buys during their Buy phase.


Quote
Convoy: Action, $3  ★★☆☆☆
+3 Cards
Discard a card. You may pay a Trade token, to play this again.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.


Quote
Floodgate: Victory, $3  ★★★★☆
Worth 2 VP.

When you gain this, set it aside along with up to 4 cards from your hand. At the start of your next turn, put all the set-aside cards into your hand.


Quote
Gambler: Action, $3  ★★★★★
+1 Card
+1 Action
Look at the top card of your deck and choose one: Trash that card; or put that card into your hand and trash this.


Quote
Tinker: Action, $3  ★★★☆☆
+$1
Trash 2 cards from your hand. You may pay a Trade token, to gain a card costing up to their total cost.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.


Quote
Dignitary: Action–Reaction, $4  ★★★☆☆
+2 Cards
+$2
Put 2 cards from your hand onto your deck.

When another player plays an Attack card, you may discard this, to trash a card from your hand, then draw 2 cards.


Quote
Profiteer: Action, $4  ★★☆☆☆
Gain a Gold onto your deck. Each other player gains an Armament from the Armament pile.


Quote
Stockpile: Treasure, $4  ★★★☆☆
Worth $1
When you play this, you may pay a Trade token, to gain a copy of a card you have in play. Otherwise, take a Trade token.


Quote
Terrace: Action, $4  ★★★★☆
+1 Card
+2 Actions
You may pay a Trade token, to discard your hand and draw 5 Cards.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.


Quote
Almoner: Action, $5  ★★★★☆
Discard any number of cards, then draw until you have 7 cards in hand. Each other player may gain a Copper to their hand.


Quote
Bladesmith: Action, $5  ★★★☆☆
Gain an Armament from the Armament pile to your hand.


Quote
Conclave: Action, $5  ★★★☆☆
+1 Action
Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. From those cards, put an Action card, a Treasure, and a Victory card into your hand. Put the rest back in any order.


Quote
Fund: Treasure, $5  ★★★☆☆
Worth $2
+1 Buy
When you play this, you may trash it, to gain a Silver to your hand.


Quote
General: Action, $5  ★★★☆☆
You may play an Action card from your hand twice. When you discard that card from play, you may put it onto your deck.


Quote
Harbor: Action, $5  ★★★☆☆
Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. Put any number of them into your hand. Put the rest back in any order. +$1 per card you put back.


Quote
Vendor: Action, $5  ★★☆☆☆
+1 Card
+1 Action
+$1
Look through your discard pile. You may pay a token, to put a card from it into your hand.

When you gain this, take a Trade token.


Quote
Study: Action–Duration, $6  ★☆☆☆☆
+$3
During your next turn, when you play an Action card, first draw until you have 5 cards in hand.

Ancillary (Non-Kingdom) Cards


Quote
Armament: Treasure–Attack, $4*  ★★★☆☆
Worth $2
When you play this, if you have another Attack card in play, return this to the Armament pile and each other player gains a Curse.
(This is not in the Supply.)

Outtakes
These cards don't fit into Enterprise anymore, but most of them were balanced and all had their fans. A version of Conclave was cut for balanced reasons, and the tweaked version is here since I haven't tested it myself yet.


Quote
Mill Town: Action, $3  ★★★★☆
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Discard a card. You may reveal your hand, to gain a card costing up to $1 per Copper in your hand.
Quote
Refurbish: Action, $4  ★★★☆☆
+1 Buy
You may trash a card from your hand to gain a Silver.

While this is in play, Silver produces an extra $1.
Quote
Barter: Action, $5  ★★★☆☆
+1 Action
Trash a card from your hand. Gain a card costing up to $2 more than it. You may pay a Trade token to put the gained card into your hand.

When you buy this, take a Trade token per Silver you have in play.

Phew, that's all the cards. Again, I'd like to thank rinkworks for his encouragement during this set's first few baby steps. My, how far we've come. I'd like to thank lympi for helping me learn how to mock up card images. I'd especially like to thank those of you who have playtested my cards and given me feedback. This set would not be as good as it is today without you! I will continue to strive to improve it.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2016, 12:27:01 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

Tejayes

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 171
  • Respect: +112
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2012, 11:55:38 pm »
+1

So far, these look really good, LastFootnote. I especially like going through the changes made with each card from your earlier thread, from the relatively minor (bumping Mill Town's Copper requirement from 2 to 3) to the major (basically mutating Prospector into Surveyor). I only have a few questions about some of the cards:

Quote
Surveyor
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. You may reveal then discard a card from your hand that is not a Victory card. If you do, trash this and gain a copy of the revealed card.

I'm guessing that since this is basically the newest card in your set, it hasn't had as much playtesting as the others. Is this true? Either way, what has your testing shown about opening with Surveyor. I would guess that unless you want to gain lots of Caravans or some other spammable $4, you'd want to wait to use the one-shot Mint-that-works-on-most-Actions-but-not-Harems until you draw a spammable expensive card like Grand Market or King's Court. I'd still rather open with this than Prospector, though.

Quote
Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: $4
Worth 2 VP.
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

In your previous thread, you mentioned your apprehension about this card's interaction with Ironworks. I actually like that interaction, since you can basically choose what to draw when you use IW to gain Aqueduct, assuming Aqueduct's effect resolves before Ironwork's bonus. What I don't like is how dual-type cards like Nobles and Harem are discarded as well. Have you tried a Farming Village-like wording, such as "Discard the revealed cards that are not Actions or Treasures, then put the rest back on top in any order" or "Put the revealed Action and Treasure cards back on top in any order, then discard the rest"?

Quote
Mercenary
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards from his deck, discarding one that you choose and putting the other back on top.

I have nothing to say about the card itself, which I like. My question is, is that Guts from Berserk depicted in the image?

Quote
Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$2. Trash this card. Name a Kingdom card. Each other player reveals then discards the top 4 cards from his deck. If the named card is revealed, gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

I'm debating whether this should be labeled as an Attack, since it now affects all other players instead of just the player to the left (a key reason why Possession and Tribute are not Attacks). Then again, it's a one-shot effect, and it doesn't leave junk on top like Rabble or Fortune Teller.

Quote
Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
When you gain this, gain a Conscripts card.

Conscripts
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $0*
+$2. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in his hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

Yeah, without other Attacks available, I wouldn't like this as an IGG-like card. For one, IGG always helps toward buying IGGs or Duchies, especially when you have more than one in hand. The problem with Barracks in the same situation is three-fold: if you have more than one Barracks and only one Conscripts left, all but one of the Barracks are useless unless you have a good drawer; if you have just the one Barracks/Conscripts and you draw both in the same hand, Barracks is once again useless; and once all Conscripts are used, the Barracks are just super-weak Villages, which I see as worse than IGG's "weak Silver" effect, especially with Gardens in play. I still like this with other good attacks in play, though.

Quote
Tax Collector
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards). He may gain a card costing less than it.

Have you tested this against Goons? Both are $6 Woodcutters with Attacks, and I agree that Tax Collector's attack is stronger than Goons' for the most part. However, the real meat of Goons is the +VP with each Buy. I would guess that in games without good +Actions or any way to play more than one Goons at a time, Tax Collector might often be stronger. With the ability to multi-Goons, though, I doubt the efficacy of Tax Collector other than as a way to thwart some mega-Goons hands. Let us know what Goons vs. Tax Collector is like, please.
Logged

timchen

  • Minion
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 704
  • Shuffle iT Username: allfail
  • Respect: +233
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2012, 01:29:37 am »
+4

Very polished cards and very nice graphics too! I like mill town and barracks in particular.
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9146
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2012, 02:22:34 am »
+2

Quote
Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$2. Trash this card. Name a Kingdom card. Each other player reveals then discards the top 4 cards from his deck. If the named card is revealed, gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

I'm debating whether this should be labeled as an Attack, since it now affects all other players instead of just the player to the left (a key reason why Possession and Tribute are not Attacks). Then again, it's a one-shot effect, and it doesn't leave junk on top like Rabble or Fortune Teller.

Well, Possession technically doesn't hurt the other player because they still get their turn, and Tribute doesn't hurt either because it's just as likely that you're clearing junk from the top of their deck as you are to be discarding good stuff.  Likewise with this card -- it's not an Attack.  Affecting all other players does not make it an attack -- consider Masquerade, which affects all players as well.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #4 on: April 01, 2012, 03:02:08 am »
+1

Quote
Surveyor
Types: Action
Cost: $3
+2 Cards. You may reveal then discard a card from your hand that is not a Victory card. If you do, trash this and gain a copy of the revealed card.

I'm guessing that since this is basically the newest card in your set, it hasn't had as much playtesting as the others. Is this true? Either way, what has your testing shown about opening with Surveyor. I would guess that unless you want to gain lots of Caravans or some other spammable $4, you'd want to wait to use the one-shot Mint-that-works-on-most-Actions-but-not-Harems until you draw a spammable expensive card like Grand Market or King's Court. I'd still rather open with this than Prospector, though.

Well, Gambler, which is a mutated and much simplified form of Tinker, is technically newer than Surveyor. But yeah, Surveyor is pretty recent. Prospector actually went through a huge number of wacky iterations before it became Surveyor. At one point it was, "+2 Cards. You may reveal your hand. If the total cost of the revealed cards is exactly $7, trash this and gain 2 Golds." I definitely like Surveyor better than any iteration of Prospector, though. It's harsh, but flexible.

Anyhow, as far as openings go, Surveyor hasn't been awful. I wouldn't open with it if, say, Militia were available, but the card draw gives you a bit of a buying power boost until you can trash it for something awesome. Actually, since I posted this thread I played an Alchemy game where I opened Surveyor/Potion. It was good enough to get me to $3P for my first Familiar on turn 3 or 4. Later in the game (but still pretty early), I played a Surveyor and had a Philosopher's Stone in hand. Long story short, Surveyor is great for accumulating Philosopher's Stones because you don't mind discarding them early in the game and it's fantastic having a bunch in the late game. I got two extra Stones that way.

Quote
Quote
Aqueduct
Types: Victory
Cost: $4
Worth 2 VP.
When you gain this, reveal the top 5 cards of your deck. Discard the revealed Victory and Curse cards and put the rest back on top in any order.

In your previous thread, you mentioned your apprehension about this card's interaction with Ironworks. I actually like that interaction, since you can basically choose what to draw when you use IW to gain Aqueduct, assuming Aqueduct's effect resolves before Ironwork's bonus. What I don't like is how dual-type cards like Nobles and Harem are discarded as well. Have you tried a Farming Village-like wording, such as "Discard the revealed cards that are not Actions or Treasures, then put the rest back on top in any order" or "Put the revealed Action and Treasure cards back on top in any order, then discard the rest"?

I decided that I liked the Ironworks interaction too, and that it wouldn't slow things down too much. So the ability will stay on-gain!

As far as the wording of the card, I was definitely conscious that it discarded dual-type Victory cards when I designed it, but I honestly couldn't tell you why I decided to go with that wording anyway. I like your "Put the revealed Action and Treasure cards back on top in any order, then discard the rest" wording and I do believe I'll try that version out. Aqueduct hasn't gotten that much play in our test games yet, so it could use the boost.

Quote
Quote
Mercenary
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. +1 Action. You may discard a Treasure card from your hand. If you don't, trash this card. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards from his deck, discarding one that you choose and putting the other back on top.

I have nothing to say about the card itself, which I like. My question is, is that Guts from Berserk depicted in the image?

Yes, yes it is. I haven't seen the Berserk anime for many years, but as soon as the image came up in my search, I thought, "That's perfect!"

Quote
Quote
Monopoly
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$2. Trash this card. Name a Kingdom card. Each other player reveals then discards the top 4 cards from his deck. If the named card is revealed, gain a Gold, putting it on top of your deck.
When you buy this, trash a Kingdom card from the Supply.

I'm debating whether this should be labeled as an Attack, since it now affects all other players instead of just the player to the left (a key reason why Possession and Tribute are not Attacks). Then again, it's a one-shot effect, and it doesn't leave junk on top like Rabble or Fortune Teller.

Yeah, like eHalcyon said, I didn't make it an Attack because it doesn't hurt the other players on average. Several iterations of the card did just work on the player to your left, but I think it'll get more play this way. In 2-player games, it's useful when your opponent is buying up most of one card, like Minion, Caravan, or Gardens. I figure that in multi-plalyer games, it'll be useful when all of your opponents open with the same card. Time will tell.

Quote
Quote
Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, discard the other cards, then play the Attack card.
When you gain this, gain a Conscripts card.

Conscripts
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $0*
+$2. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse, putting it in his hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

Yeah, without other Attacks available, I wouldn't like this as an IGG-like card. For one, IGG always helps toward buying IGGs or Duchies, especially when you have more than one in hand. The problem with Barracks in the same situation is three-fold: if you have more than one Barracks and only one Conscripts left, all but one of the Barracks are useless unless you have a good drawer; if you have just the one Barracks/Conscripts and you draw both in the same hand, Barracks is once again useless; and once all Conscripts are used, the Barracks are just super-weak Villages, which I see as worse than IGG's "weak Silver" effect, especially with Gardens in play. I still like this with other good attacks in play, though.

I agree with everything you said. I kind of like that it's a reliable Curse effect that you nevertheless may not want to use until the Curses run out. The +2 Actions effect is very weak, but the dig-for-an-Attack effect is quite strong, and I felt like it needed some usage for games with no other Attacks. It used to be +1 Card/+2 Actions until I realized that an unscrupulous player could, in theory, glance at the top card of their deck as they picked it up and then decide whether they were drawing or revealing it. I had it at +2 Actions/+$1 for a while on paper, but the version here is the only one that's actually been playtested so far. I had guessed that the +2 Actions/+1 Coin would be too powerful, but I should probably test it at some point.

Quote
Quote
Tax Collector
Types: Action - Attack
Cost: $6
+1 Buy. +2 Coins. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand trashes a card from his hand costing 2 Coins or more (or reveals a hand with no such cards). He may gain a card costing less than it.

Have you tested this against Goons? Both are $6 Woodcutters with Attacks, and I agree that Tax Collector's attack is stronger than Goons' for the most part. However, the real meat of Goons is the +VP with each Buy. I would guess that in games without good +Actions or any way to play more than one Goons at a time, Tax Collector might often be stronger. With the ability to multi-Goons, though, I doubt the efficacy of Tax Collector other than as a way to thwart some mega-Goons hands. Let us know what Goons vs. Tax Collector is like, please.

I have yet to play a game with both cards, but I will do so and let you know how it goes. Regardless of how they stack up in a direct confrontation, I really hope Tax Collector isn't as strong as Goons in general. I priced Tax Collector at $6 partly because of its power and partly so that you could never open with it. I've found that it needs a long game in order for it to stop being a liability and start doing some real damage. It seems to work better in conjunction with cursing attacks, for instance.

Thanks for your questions and feedback!
Logged

dor

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
  • Respect: +22
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #5 on: April 01, 2012, 04:40:36 am »
+1

Great cards and lovely artwork! I wish this was an official expansion.
Logged

Kenuru

  • Pearl Diver
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2012, 05:30:12 am »
+9

Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3324
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #7 on: April 01, 2012, 07:53:59 am »
+2

Great cards and lovely artwork! I wish this was an official expansion.
Yeah, the artwork is spectacular and the cards are very interesting!
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

Thanar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2012, 01:34:55 pm »
+1

This is an interesting and great-looking expansion. Do you have any higher resolution images and/or 9-up PDFs ready for printing? I'd love to print out a set of these.
Logged

MrZNF

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2012, 01:38:51 pm »
+1

Is Mercenary really that strong? If I look at it, it seems like a worse version of Spice Merchant, since it discards the coppers instead of trashing them. Only plus being that it first draws and then you have more cards to choose from (thus more chance of there being coppers instead of silvers). Other + is obviously that you can't dead draw it, but if you have to trash it afterwards that doesn't seem like a very nice way to go.

Looking at what happens, it's either just a cantrip if you discard the copper (so it possibly makes your hand a little better) or you lose the Mercenary.

I'm not saying it's a bad card, it possibly has nice synergies with other cards, but I am not quite getting why it would be so strong.
Logged

Davio

  • 2012 Dutch Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4733
  • Respect: +3324
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2012, 01:47:08 pm »
+1

Well, he says it's a powerful $4 card. That's different from saying it's a powerful card.

Spy is also $4 and this seems a lot better than Spy to me.
Logged

BSG: Cagprezimal Adama
Mage Knight: Arythea

MrZNF

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2012, 02:15:54 pm »
+1

Well, he says it's a powerful $4 card. That's different from saying it's a powerful card.

Spy is also $4 and this seems a lot better than Spy to me.

Well, I am saying that I don't see it as a very powerful $4 card, but then again, I have not play tested it and might be missing something vital. For now I'd prefer a Caravan, Moneylender, SpiceMerchant, Militia, etc. over this one. Basically it means I wouldn't start with this card for my first $4 buy (on a 3/4 split) even if there are no other good $4's. I'd rather start silver/silver.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2012, 02:37:17 pm »
+1

Great cards and lovely artwork! I wish this was an official expansion.

Yeah, the artwork is spectacular and the cards are very interesting!

Thanks! Although I obviously can't take credit for the artwork. I wish I could have found out the artists for every image, but a couple of them still elude me. Does anybody know who created the Cathedral image?

This is an interesting and great-looking expansion. Do you have any higher resolution images and/or 9-up PDFs ready for printing? I'd love to print out a set of these.

Thanks for your interest! I do have versions of these cards with twice the resolution that you see here. I'll post them to my photobucket and provide a link tomorrow. If you do end up printing them, please let me know about your experiences with them. The more playtesting, the better these cards will end up being.

Is Mercenary really that strong? If I look at it, it seems like a worse version of Spice Merchant, since it discards the coppers instead of trashing them. Only plus being that it first draws and then you have more cards to choose from (thus more chance of there being coppers instead of silvers). Other + is obviously that you can't dead draw it, but if you have to trash it afterwards that doesn't seem like a very nice way to go.

Looking at what happens, it's either just a cantrip if you discard the copper (so it possibly makes your hand a little better) or you lose the Mercenary.

I'm not saying it's a bad card, it possibly has nice synergies with other cards, but I am not quite getting why it would be so strong.

Well, he says it's a powerful $4 card. That's different from saying it's a powerful card.

Spy is also $4 and this seems a lot better than Spy to me.

Well, I am saying that I don't see it as a very powerful $4 card, but then again, I have not play tested it and might be missing something vital. For now I'd prefer a Caravan, Moneylender, SpiceMerchant, Militia, etc. over this one. Basically it means I wouldn't start with this card for my first $4 buy (on a 3/4 split) even if there are no other good $4's. I'd rather start silver/silver.

Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that it's a super-powerful $4 card. If it were that powerful, I'd nerf it or bump its cost to $5. Gerenally, though, its power is that even though it doesn't usually increase your handsize, it provides as much deck cycling as a Laboratory. It allows you to build fairly effective Conspirator and Minion type decks without trashing your Coppers. It's slightly better than Spy in this regard.

Also, you're right about not opening with it. To be fair, though, there aren't a lot of non-terminal cards I'd open with, especially at $4. A Mercenary/Swindler opening is the big exception I've found so far. Mercenary makes it really easy to zero in on those Coppers!
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2012, 03:00:00 pm »
+1

I love the way you've handled this one-shot theme. Having most one-shots be optional or avoidable is an interesting risk to the game and is a wonderful bit of decision making.

I might say Clerk's Action is a bit too good for $2. You get the best of 3 cards and an extra $1 on the side. I might remove the $1 or lower the number of cards that are revealed.

I like Gambler-- though would probably prefer the name refer to the Gambling Hall rather than the man doing the gambling. That's semantics though. Mechanically, its effect is cute as a trasher, but it sucks as a drawer since it is a one-shot. I probably wouldn't buy it unless I wanted its trashing effects or had an extra buy and didn't need more Silver.

I'm a big fan of this one, but Mill Town might run faster if you "reveal 3 or more Coppers from your hand and gain a card costing up to the number of Coppers revealed" since we wouldn't be stuck in the awkward analysis-paralysis of trying not to reveal too many or too few Coppers. Why can't Mill Town gain a card that costs $2, anyway?

Surveyer is okay. +2 Cards I've always found to be a weak, nearly useless effect thrown onto cards with stronger alternate effects-- and that seems to be the case here. I'm pretty unimpressed by this card overall though. I wouldn't usually buy it-- even with a spare $3 unless there was a really good $6 Action in play that I wanted more than one of.

The price decerement supplied by Fund would rarely be worth anything. The best thing about Bridge is decreasing the price of what you want to buy to nothing so that you are limited by your buys rather than your coins, but Fund can only decrease prices by $1 on its own (which is to say, it would only be worthwhile if Bridges and Highways were in play). I'd only maybe buy one if I needed a Silver and had $4, but I can't think of any scenarios that Fund's effect would be anywhere near as useful as Bridge's or Highway's.

Monopoly sounds like one of those luck-based Kingdom Cards I would veto constantly. Its ability to trash cards from the Supply is something I'd like to play with though...

Barracks might be more useful if Conscripts wasn't gained, but could be purchased while Barracks was in play (and perhaps Conscripts are returned to their Supply instead of being trashed). As it is, I wouldn't pay $5 for Barracks unless a different, better Attack was in play. And now that I think about it, adding a +$1 to it might not be all that bad. Imagine a Market without a +Card... yeah, it has +$2 instead and is called Festival.

Well, he says [Mercenary]'s a powerful $4 card. That's different from saying it's a powerful card.

Spy is also $4 and this seems a lot better than Spy to me.
Spy can affect the top of your deck which I usually found to be the most beneficial thing it can do (especially with other cantrips in play). Affecting others was just a little bonus. Mercenary only affects other's decks and is trashed if you don't discard one of those Treasures that you could otherwise use.
It looks to me like a weaker Stables with a Spy-like effect thrown on top.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2012, 03:57:31 pm »
+1

I might say Clerk's Action is a bit too good for $2. You get the best of 3 cards and an extra $1 on the side. I might remove the $1 or lower the number of cards that are revealed.

I agree that the Action effect might be a touch too powerful. I might nerf it back down to looking at the top 2 cards of your deck rather than the top 3. The thing is that the reaction effect is useful, but slow. I wanted to give the action effect a bit more kick to compensate. At one time the reaction effect trashed down to 3 cards in hand, but I thought that would be too constricting. If there were some concise way to word Clerk such that upon revealing it you were allowed to trash any number of cards from your hand as long as you didn't dip below 3 cards in hand, I would go for that.

Quote
I like Gambler-- though would probably prefer the name refer to the Gambling Hall rather than the man doing the gambling. That's semantics though. Mechanically, its effect is cute as a trasher, but it sucks as a drawer since it is a one-shot. I probably wouldn't buy it unless I wanted its trashing effects or had an extra buy and didn't need more Silver.

Yeah, the drawing effect is definitely meant to be the consolation prize. A one-shot Laboratory is a terrible investment. Gambler is first and foremost a deck thinner. To say that you probably wouldn't buy it unless you wanted its trashing effects is completely reasonable, but I'd argue that you'd want its trashing effects in most decks.

Quote
I'm a big fan of this one, but Mill Town might run faster if you "reveal 3 or more Coppers from your hand and gain a card costing up to the number of Coppers revealed" since we wouldn't be stuck in the awkward analysis-paralysis of trying not to reveal too many or too few Coppers. Why can't Mill Town gain a card that costs $2, anyway?

Well, the reason that Mill Town can't gain $2 cards is that I was afraid that it would be too easy to run out piles with it. A hand with 3 Mill Towns and 2 Coppers could gain 4 Estates, after all. Now that I think about it, I see no real problem with the gaining being 'up to' the number of Coppers revealed as long as you still have to reveal at least 3 Coppers. I'll change the wording. I think I actually have to reword the card anyway, because as it's currently written, I think you could gain, say, a Familiar by revealing 3 Coppers.

Quote
Surveyer is okay. +2 Cards I've always found to be a weak, nearly useless effect thrown onto cards with stronger alternate effects-- and that seems to be the case here. I'm pretty unimpressed by this card overall though. I wouldn't usually buy it-- even with a spare $3 unless there was a really good $6 Action in play that I wanted more than one of.

Yeah, it's a situational card to be sure. They can't all be power cards! I think with a little playtesting, though, you'd find it to be more useful that it seems at first glance. That +2 Cards really does help in the early game and it's a decent opener in the absence of powerful $3 and $4 Attack cards. Then in the midgame, you can trash it for a more powerful $5 or $6 terminal without increasing the density of terminal Action cards in your deck. Or you can trash it for a useful non-terminal that you've drawn dead, like Bazaar. If you get $9 in the early midgame, including a Gold, you can trash your Surveyor and pick up 2 Golds that turn.

I'll continue to test it, and if it turns out to be too weak, I'll buff it in some way. Perhaps in order to gain a copy of the revealed card, you have to put it on your deck instead of discarding it?

Quote
The price decerement supplied by Fund would rarely be worth anything. The best thing about Bridge is decreasing the price of what you want to buy to nothing so that you are limited by your buys rather than your coins, but Fund can only decrease prices by $1 on its own (which is to say, it would only be worthwhile if Bridges and Highways were in play). I'd only maybe buy one if I needed a Silver and had $4, but I can't think of any scenarios that Fund's effect would be anywhere near as useful as Bridge's or Highway's.

Well, in the absence of Bridge or Highway, the price-lowering ability of Fund is basically useful in a few situations. First, you trash it early in order to pick up a Gold or other $6 card on turn 3 or 4. Second, if you have $8, $9, or $10 to spend, including a fund, you can trash it to pick up two $5 cards, a $5 and $6 card, or two $6 cards, respectively. Or you can trash it late-game to bump yourself from $7 to $8 for a Province. A one-shot Gold for $4 isn't bad. The price-lowering is there because it's more flexible, and in some ways easier to track, than just giving an extra $1 to spend.

That being said, I'm considering bumping its cost to $5 and removing the hand-discarding penalty. That would completely change the way the card plays and the situations it would be useful in, but I'm open to the possibility.

Quote
Monopoly sounds like one of those luck-based Kingdom Cards I would veto constantly. Its ability to trash cards from the Supply is something I'd like to play with though...

Well, the card has three effects: the Supply-trashing, the +$2, and the Gold-gaining. Only one of those three is luck-based. Putting a Gold on your deck is good, but not immediately game-winning.

The card is basically meant to fight decks that load up on a single card without discouraging the buying of Kingdom cards in general. If more playtesting reveals that it leads to boring games, I may have to change which cards can be chosen for each effect.

Quote
Barracks might be more useful if Conscripts wasn't gained, but could be purchased while Barracks was in play (and perhaps Conscripts are returned to their Supply instead of being trashed). As it is, I wouldn't pay $5 for Barracks unless a different, better Attack was in play. And now that I think about it, adding a +$1 to it might not be all that bad. Imagine a Market without a +Card... yeah, it has +$2 instead and is called Festival.

Yes, I might add that +$1 back. I just don't want it to be too powerful in games with other Attacks. Curses are bad enough that even in some games without other Attacks, you'd be willing to pick up a Barracks or two. It depends on what's available. As long as it's never completely useless, it's OK with me if it's a poor buy in some games. That's what Dominion is all about!

Quote
Well, he says [Mercenary]'s a powerful $4 card. That's different from saying it's a powerful card.

Spy is also $4 and this seems a lot better than Spy to me.
Spy can affect the top of your deck which I usually found to be the most beneficial thing it can do (especially with other cantrips in play). Affecting others was just a little bonus. Mercenary only affects other's decks and is trashed if you don't discard one of those Treasures that you could otherwise use.
It looks to me like a weaker Stables with a Spy-like effect thrown on top.

That's more or less what it is. Keep in mind, though, that while Spy can cycle through the top 2 cards of your deck, Mercenary always does. I originally had the attack effect on Mercenary be identical to Spy (meaning that it could discard the top card and affected you too). That version was stupid powerful with chaining cards like Conspirator. Being able to non-terminally cycle through 3 cards at a time is no joke.

Thanks for your constructive criticism!
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2012, 04:46:25 pm »
0

I might say Clerk's Action is a bit too good for $2. You get the best of 3 cards and an extra $1 on the side. I might remove the $1 or lower the number of cards that are revealed.

I agree that the Action effect might be a touch too powerful. I might nerf it back down to looking at the top 2 cards of your deck rather than the top 3. The thing is that the reaction effect is useful, but slow. I wanted to give the action effect a bit more kick to compensate. At one time the reaction effect trashed down to 3 cards in hand, but I thought that would be too constricting. If there were some concise way to word Clerk such that upon revealing it you were allowed to trash any number of cards from your hand as long as you didn't dip below 3 cards in hand, I would go for that.

I had no qualms with Clerk's Reaction (and it did seem to be the main event of the card), but it is slow. The most semantically correct and concise method I can think of acquiring your effect is invoking the infinite-reveal clause and abusing that. "When another player plays an Attack card and you have 4 or more cards in your hand, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand."

Otherwise, you could go for something that doesn't require such intense knowledge of how Reactions work: "When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, you may trash cards from your hand until you have 3 cards in hand." (which is to say, this is a loop that repeats until you have 3 cards in hand or choose not to trash a card)
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2947
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3762
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2012, 07:17:10 pm »
0

The most semantically correct and concise method I can think of acquiring your effect is invoking the infinite-reveal clause and abusing that. "When another player plays an Attack card and you have 4 or more cards in your hand, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash a card from your hand."

I'm not quite sure this works. Consider the Mandarin / Royal Seal interaction:
  • You have Royal Seal in play; gain Mandarin.
  • Two effects are triggered: top-decking Mandarin, and top-decking Royal Seal.
  • You choose to top-deck Royal Seal first.
  • Now Royal Seal is no longer in play, but you may still top-deck Mandarin, since the effect was already triggered.

I feel like something similar might happen with Clerk:
  • You have 4 cards in hand, including two Clerks. Someone plays an attack.
  • Both Clerks are triggered.
  • You reveal one Clerk and trash a card.
  • Now you have less than 4 cards in hand, but you may still reveal the other Clerk, since it has already been triggered (and you merely chose to reveal the other one first).
...and anything you can do with two copies of a Reaction in hand you can do with one copy of a Reaction in hand.

It seems to me that this argument ought to be valid. If it's not, I'm not sure why not, except that Reactions are confusing, man. (I still don't understand how the rules prevent you from revealing the same Tunnel multiple times on one discard.)
Logged

jonts26

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2734
  • Shuffle iT Username: jonts
  • Respect: +3631
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2012, 07:47:18 pm »
0

I feel like something similar might happen with Clerk:
  • You have 4 cards in hand, including two Clerks. Someone plays an attack.
  • Both Clerks are triggered.
  • You reveal one Clerk and trash a card.
  • Now you have less than 4 cards in hand, but you may still reveal the other Clerk, since it has already been triggered (and you merely chose to reveal the other one first).
...and anything you can do with two copies of a Reaction in hand you can do with one copy of a Reaction in hand.

I'm not sure this is right since reactions do not trigger automatically, but are chosen to be revealed (think about what happens when you have both secret chamber and moat.) If this is the case, you resolve each one sequentially, so only 1 card can be trashed.

EDIT: But back to the topic of the cards wording, Fragansnap is correct. Since you can reveal a reaction (in response to an attack) multiple times, you just have to say 'if you have more than n cards in hand, you may trash a card'. Then just keep revealing it until you've trashed however many cards you want to/can.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2012, 07:58:18 pm by jonts26 »
Logged

AJD

  • Margrave
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2947
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJD
  • Respect: +3762
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2012, 08:02:38 pm »
0

I feel like something similar might happen with Clerk:
  • You have 4 cards in hand, including two Clerks. Someone plays an attack.
  • Both Clerks are triggered.
  • You reveal one Clerk and trash a card.
  • Now you have less than 4 cards in hand, but you may still reveal the other Clerk, since it has already been triggered (and you merely chose to reveal the other one first).
...and anything you can do with two copies of a Reaction in hand you can do with one copy of a Reaction in hand.

I'm not sure this is right since reactions do not trigger automatically, but are chosen to be revealed (think about what happens when you have both secret chamber and moat.) If this is the case, you resolve each one sequentially, so only 1 card can be trashed.

Hmm, good point. (Which just raises further questions, I think.... Man, reactions are confusing.)
Logged

Big Tuna

  • Swindler
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 15
  • Respect: +8
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2012, 10:31:40 pm »
0

Mercenary seems like a very powerful combo creator. I can forsee a short game with KC and Bridge/Masquerade.
Logged

mangsky

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #20 on: April 02, 2012, 11:35:56 pm »
0

NICE!
Logged

petrie911

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
  • Respect: +108
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #21 on: April 04, 2012, 01:56:40 am »
+2

"When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand.  If you do, choose 3 or more cards in your hand and trash the rest."

I'm pretty sure that works.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #22 on: April 04, 2012, 09:01:30 am »
+1

"When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand.  If you do, choose 3 or more cards in your hand and trash the rest."

I'm pretty sure that works.

Nice! That is beautiful! Thanks for the elegant solution.

I'll edit the card to say that later today and then upload the hi-res versions I promised. I already changed Aquedect to use the 'Treasure and Action' wording (as you can see), and I've updated (but not yet uploaded) Mill Town to say 'gain a card costing up to $1 per Copper revealed'.
Logged

NinjaBus

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
  • Respect: +18
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #23 on: April 05, 2012, 12:51:44 am »
+1

I like the set a lot, the trashing on use theme hasn't really been used in dominion. As such, you get to make the one shot cards more interesting. Here's just a few thoughts...

What if Barracks scouted for attack cards instead of searching for them? Then you could combine the + actions and the + card and sketchy players couldn't cheat the system. Even if there is no other attack card, it's still a 5$ village which curses once.

Barracks: +1 card / +2 actions, reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Place any revealed attack cards into your hand, and discard the rest. :: When you gain this, gain a conscripts.

I say discard the non-attack cards instead of placing them back on the deck for balance reasons, if you could use it to set up a draw chain it would be way too effective.

*Edit* I'm keeping that idea up for discussion, but I realized that as is in certain trashing heavy games, or with scrying pool, (don't even imagine ambassador) that card as suggested is way too good.

Honestly just make it "+1 card / +2 actions, when you gain this card gain a conscripts." It might be a little boring, but it's balanced and never useless in a kingdom set.

I like fund, one shot gold is never bad. However, you might want to restrict the +buy to only when you trash it, otherwise it blows woodcutter out of the water. Did you have problems in playtesting if it's effect stacked with itself? The upshot of bridge is that you can use it to buy more of itself rapidly, but with fund you can't, since you trash it in the process. It might be slow enough that without other sources of income massing lab/fund isn't automatically a winning strategy.

Cathedral appears to be godly powerful at first glance. Its 1 card draw short of embassy, a card so good it gives your opponent silvers when you buy it. And it even trashes instead of discarding your crap cards! If you want, you can even move money to your next hand if you've gone over 8$. Yikes. Ironically, making it trash more and courtyard more would be really cool. What about "+4 cards, trash up to 4 cards from your hand and place your hand on top of your deck in any order?"

I'm sorry if I'm completely changing how you wanted these cards to be played, but I'm a bit tired and fairly inspired by what you have here. :)
« Last Edit: April 05, 2012, 01:33:55 am by NinjaBus »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #24 on: April 05, 2012, 11:18:45 am »
+1

What if Barracks scouted for attack cards instead of searching for them? Then you could combine the + actions and the + card and sketchy players couldn't cheat the system. Even if there is no other attack card, it's still a 5$ village which curses once.

Barracks: +1 card / +2 actions, reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Place any revealed attack cards into your hand, and discard the rest. :: When you gain this, gain a conscripts.

I say discard the non-attack cards instead of placing them back on the deck for balance reasons, if you could use it to set up a draw chain it would be way too effective.

*Edit* I'm keeping that idea up for discussion, but I realized that as is in certain trashing heavy games, or with scrying pool, (don't even imagine ambassador) that card as suggested is way too good.

Honestly just make it "+1 card / +2 actions, when you gain this card gain a conscripts." It might be a little boring, but it's balanced and never useless in a kingdom set.

I like your 'Scout for Attacks' idea. It also gets around the fact that there could potentially someday be an Attack card that isn't an Action (which would throw the current version of Barracks for a loop). As you say, it might easily be too powerful in many decks.

As far as balance goes, the current version of Barracks seems OK in testing so far. Yeah, the +2 Actions is a pretty poor option, but sometimes you need it. Nobles is a good example. Ideally you want to use Nobles for +3 Cards, but it's nice to have the +2 Actions as a backup. Even when there are no other Attack cards available, sometimes it's worth going for Barracks. Curses are powerful enough that if there's no good Curse trashing or there is good trash-for-benefit, Barracks can still be worth the price of admission.

Quote
I like fund, one shot gold is never bad. However, you might want to restrict the +buy to only when you trash it, otherwise it blows woodcutter out of the water. Did you have problems in playtesting if it's effect stacked with itself? The upshot of bridge is that you can use it to buy more of itself rapidly, but with fund you can't, since you trash it in the process. It might be slow enough that without other sources of income massing lab/fund isn't automatically a winning strategy.

Well, it definitely does blow Woodcutter out of the water, but to be fair, it does cost (ever so slightly) more and Woodcutter is a pretty weak card. In addition, using an Action chain, you could in theory play multiple Woodcutters on the same turn, which you can't do with Fund. That being said, I'm revamping Clerk at the moment, and if I give it +1 Buy, I'd be more amenable to restricting Fund's +1 Buy to the one-shot effect.

When you ask if I had problems with its effect stacking with itself, do you mean playing and trashing multiple Funds? With just the cards in this set and the official cards, that's impossible. When you play Fund, you discard your hand, so the first Fund you play discards all other Funds in hand. It's the only way I could think of to price a Silver-with a bonus at $4, and I don't think anybody would buy a one-shot Gold at $5. Maybe I'm wrong, though.

As you say, trashing a Fund and buying another Fund on the same turn is a waste of coins, unless you have other cards like Bridge and Highway in play that are lowering costs further.

Quote
Cathedral appears to be godly powerful at first glance. Its 1 card draw short of embassy, a card so good it gives your opponent silvers when you buy it. And it even trashes instead of discarding your crap cards! If you want, you can even move money to your next hand if you've gone over 8$. Yikes. Ironically, making it trash more and courtyard more would be really cool. What about "+4 cards, trash up to 4 cards from your hand and place your hand on top of your deck in any order?"

Well, OK, let me tell you about the history of Cathedral. Originally, it was, "+3 Cards. +1 Action. Put 2 cards back on your deck. You may spend a token. If you do, reveal the top 4 (5?) cards of your deck, trashing any of them and discarding the others. When you gain this, take a token." Rinkworks quite rightly pointed out that this could decide the game on a 5/2 split, since it blows Chapel out of the water. So I changed the token spending effect to, "If you do, trash the top 2 cards of your deck."

Then, I tested that version with my wife. It was a game with some Curse-giver. She kept buying up Cathedrals in order to gain tokens and be able to trash the Curses. It was non-terminal, after all, so you could buy up a ton and the only downside was opportunity cost. Well, it turns out that repeatedly drawing 3 cards and putting 2 back, only to draw them when you play your next Cathedral is really annoying. Even if buying a ton wasn't the optimal strategy, I realized that enough players would do it that I couldn't make it non-terminal.

So I took away the +1 Action and gave it two things to compensate. The first was bumping it up from +3 Cards to +4 Cards. The second was having it get you two tokens instead of one. This is the version of the card you currently see in the thread. As recent testing has revealed, this was overkill. I will soon update the card so that you only get one token upon gaining the card.

So, anyhow, I like your whole 'trash up to 4 and put the rest back' idea, but it's a bit far removed from the card I have. It could be a very cool mechanic for a new card, though. Just be careful of it dominating on a 5/2 split.

Once you can only trash once per copy of Cathedral you gain, the rest of the card might be OK as it stands. Yes, you can use it to put excess Treasure back on your deck, but it does only net you 1 card in hand (like Moat) and there are definitely times when you'd rather discard 2 cards than put 2 back (which is part of why Embassy is so powerful).

Quote
I'm sorry if I'm completely changing how you wanted these cards to be played, but I'm a bit tired and fairly inspired by what you have here. :)

Thanks for your feedback! If any of these three cards turns out to need more tweaking, I'll definitely try out your suggestions.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #25 on: April 06, 2012, 02:17:28 am »
+1

OK, I've updated Clerk and Cathedral and reworded Mill Town. Hi-res versions of the cards can be found here.
Logged

Thanar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #26 on: April 06, 2012, 07:09:56 am »
+1

Many thanks for your work on this set! I'll be printing it out and trying it this weekend.

As I was downloading the images, I did notice that the title text "Gambler" on the gambler.png images has some aliasing (jaggies), unlike all of the other cards, which are very smooth. This is the case with both the low and hi-res versions of that card. I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to fix it.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #27 on: April 06, 2012, 09:59:10 am »
+1

Many thanks for your work on this set! I'll be printing it out and trying it this weekend.

As I was downloading the images, I did notice that the title text "Gambler" on the gambler.png images has some aliasing (jaggies), unlike all of the other cards, which are very smooth. This is the case with both the low and hi-res versions of that card. I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to fix it.

Unfortunately, those jaggies were there even before I transformed the image into the .PNG format. The 'G' in that font at that size just looks like that, even as you type it in. I noticed it myself when I created the card. Thanks for the attention to detail, though!

Anyhow, if you test out the cards, please let me know how they work out.

EDIT: I just changed Conscripts, partly for set-cohesiveness reasons and partly for simplicity. It no longer gains the Curse into your opponents' hands.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2012, 04:17:47 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Thanar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #28 on: April 10, 2012, 01:02:41 am »
+2

I playtested all the cards in Dominion:Enterprise tonight with a couple of friends who are familiar with Dominion and several expansions, but had never seen this fan variant.

We played three games, using 7 cards from Enterprise in each game, along with a couple of standard cards, like Village, Remodel, Steward, and Masquerade, and one card from another fan variant, Dominion: Tributary (Dignitary and Hero).

Every game was fun and every game was fairly close. And almost every card was used, and we did work out some interesting combinations of cards as well.

In our first game, the initial buys centered around Mercenary which was a popular buy. But the standout card was Cathedral, which made for a rather quick game, though one with interesting decisions about which cards to put back.

Also in that game, Monopoly also allowed one player to get an early gold which helped him to a victory. I do think that Monopoly can lead to some high variance depending on when it is bought. It is easier to predict things early on, but you might draw it right after a reshuffle when it's harder to guess the cards coming up. We quickly discovered that it did synergize well with Mercenary. Once I left a better card on top of the deck with Mercenary so that the Monopoly that immediately followed was guaranteed to hit.

Aqueduct was also used mostly in an attempt to catch up from being behind in victory points near the end of the game. It definitely helped, but didn't turn the tide.

Clerk didn't seem to be too effective a reaction, at least with the attacks that we were using (from this expansion). The ability to trash one or two cards is not always that helpful when the attack itself (e.g. Tax Collector) is going to trash a card worth 2 or more. It generally left a pretty worthless hand at the end.

Gambler was another card that didn't seem to have much impact on the game. Bought early on, it generally led to trashing a card or two before getting trashed itself when it ran into something of value. It didn't seem very worth buying later in the game. So it was probably the most "meh" card of the entire set.

In the second and third games we removed Cathedral, which allowed Inventor to really shine. Careful use of the card allowed for some very finesse endgames (e.g. Platinums trashed for the benefit of Colonies to clinch a win).

Surveyor seemed interesting, but the one time I bought it and used it it matched up with my hand full of Silver, instead of my hand with the Platinum, but I triggered it anyway just to get it out of my deck... Another player bought one and used it three times without using the self-trash effect. So, it didn't do much for us, but perhaps we didn't really try to make it work...

The Barracks and Conscripts combo was used to good effect in the second game, paired with the Tax Collector to ensure that attack got played many times, leading to my only victory of the night. We were using the Hero card that game, which happens to allow you to gain a prize (from Cornucopia) if you have two Curse cards in hand when you play it! So this actually made me avoid playing the second Conscript in one situation since it potentially could set up the Hero perfectly with gaining a curse in hand. So the change you just made to Conscript to make it a regular gain seems wise.

Mill Town seemed to get used as an OK village variant, since the discard of a card often didn't cause much harm. In our games it rarely triggered the gain of a card, probably because we weren't buying it primarily for that ability and were often trashing Copper.

Finally, Fund was used a couple of times, mostly for the ability to trash it to get a Province with 7 coin, rather than making much use of the extra buy.

After all of that, I don't have any specific suggestions for improvement at the moment, but I might come up with some after a bit more playtesting.

By the end of the night, everyone agreed that the set was interesting, entertaining, and definitely worth playing with again. Kudos to LastFootnote for designing it.

Thanar
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #29 on: April 10, 2012, 01:51:51 pm »
+1

Hey, thanks a lot for testing these out! I usually play with 4 or 5 Enterprise cards at a time, but it's cool to hear that games with 7 of the cards were still fun.

In our first game, the initial buys centered around Mercenary which was a popular buy. But the standout card was Cathedral, which made for a rather quick game, though one with interesting decisions about which cards to put back.

Hmm, it's interesting to hear that Cathedral was so powerful. I'll have to do some more playtesting and see if the card needs to be toned down. Did you use the version that gave one Cathedral token when gaining it, or the version that gained two? Did the trashing even get used much?

Quote
Also in that game, Monopoly also allowed one player to get an early gold which helped him to a victory. I do think that Monopoly can lead to some high variance depending on when it is bought. It is easier to predict things early on, but you might draw it right after a reshuffle when it's harder to guess the cards coming up. We quickly discovered that it did synergize well with Mercenary. Once I left a better card on top of the deck with Mercenary so that the Monopoly that immediately followed was guaranteed to hit.

Monopoly is one of the cards in the set that I'm least happy with. I like the card concept, but I can't really decide how to balance it. Did it ever not gain a Gold when played?

Quote
Clerk didn't seem to be too effective a reaction, at least with the attacks that we were using (from this expansion). The ability to trash one or two cards is not always that helpful when the attack itself (e.g. Tax Collector) is going to trash a card worth 2 or more. It generally left a pretty worthless hand at the end.

Clerk is the other card I'm not yet happy with. Mostly I need a better action effect. As for the reaction piece and its use against Tax Collector, the idea was that Clerk would allow you to trash a Copper or Curse, after which Tax Collector would be unable to hurt you. Did you play that Tax Collector only hit if the victim had 5 or more cards in hand?

In general, though, Clerk is meant to work best against pure discard attacks like Militia and Goons.

Quote
Gambler was another card that didn't seem to have much impact on the game. Bought early on, it generally led to trashing a card or two before getting trashed itself when it ran into something of value. It didn't seem very worth buying later in the game. So it was probably the most "meh" card of the entire set.

Yeah, there's no point to buying Gambler after the first few turns. It's definitely an early game card.

Quote
In the second and third games we removed Cathedral, which allowed Inventor to really shine. Careful use of the card allowed for some very finesse endgames (e.g. Platinums trashed for the benefit of Colonies to clinch a win).

Sounds good. Hopefully it's not too powerful.

Quote
Surveyor seemed interesting, but the one time I bought it and used it it matched up with my hand full of Silver, instead of my hand with the Platinum, but I triggered it anyway just to get it out of my deck... Another player bought one and used it three times without using the self-trash effect. So, it didn't do much for us, but perhaps we didn't really try to make it work...

Yeah, sounds like you got unlucky with it. Maybe it's underpowered as is, though. I'll have to test it some more.

Quote
The Barracks and Conscripts combo was used to good effect in the second game, paired with the Tax Collector to ensure that attack got played many times, leading to my only victory of the night. We were using the Hero card that game, which happens to allow you to gain a prize (from Cornucopia) if you have two Curse cards in hand when you play it! So this actually made me avoid playing the second Conscript in one situation since it potentially could set up the Hero perfectly with gaining a curse in hand. So the change you just made to Conscript to make it a regular gain seems wise.

Yeah, I'm glad I changed Conscripts. It just synergized too well with Tax Collector and simpler card wordings are usually better.

Thanks a lot for the feedback!
Logged

Thanar

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 123
  • Respect: +137
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #30 on: April 10, 2012, 04:06:09 pm »
+1

Hmm, it's interesting to hear that Cathedral was so powerful. I'll have to do some more playtesting and see if the card needs to be toned down. Did you use the version that gave one Cathedral token when gaining it, or the version that gained two? Did the trashing even get used much?

We used the version that gave one Cathedral token when gaining it, and the trashing was definitely used in every case. I don't think the card is too powerful. I think it is just a solid card and some of the other cards might not be powerful enough. It definitely works well with a money-based strategy, similar to how Courtyard works well with money.

I was trying to figure out an easy way to allow the purchasing of additional Cathedral tokens for more money when you buy the Cathedral (i.e. spend another coin (or two?) when purchasing the Cathedral to get another token with it). It could make for an interesting choice between getting a Gold at 6 or getting a Cathedral with 2 trash tokens... Might be worth trying.

Quote
Monopoly is one of the cards in the set that I'm least happy with. I like the card concept, but I can't really decide how to balance it. Did it ever not gain a Gold when played?

I failed to gain a Gold with it when I played it. I think that happened at least one other time. The problem is that if you fail to get a gold with it, it is a significant setback, since it is a one-shot card that costs four and is then gone. To me it was more of a gamble than Gambler (bigger gain when you succeed, bigger loss when you fail). Perhaps make the self-trashing conditional on guessing correctly?

We also didn't think that it lived up to its name, since trashing one card from the supply doesn't significantly affect the supply. Also, it is rare that any one player would buy very many of them, since its main use is to get a Gold earlier on in the game and its utility decreases later on (plus it can be a bit harder to guess the Kingdom card later on).

You could change the text below the line to read "When you buy this or trash this..." so that you get two opportunities to trash from the supply per Monopoly, rather than one.

Quote
Clerk is the other card I'm not yet happy with. Mostly I need a better action effect. As for the reaction piece and its use against Tax Collector, the idea was that Clerk would allow you to trash a Copper or Curse, after which Tax Collector would be unable to hurt you. Did you play that Tax Collector only hit if the victim had 5 or more cards in hand?

I agree that the action effect of Clerk is not very good/interesting. Perhaps you could also let the person choose to leave one of the three cards on top of the deck? It seems kind of thematic, shuffling papers around on a desk, from the inbox to the outbox...

And now that you mention it, we didn't play the Tax Collector correctly after using the Clerk reaction. I remember still trashing a card for it even though I had already trashed down to fewer that 5 cards with the Clerk.

Quote
Yeah, there's no point to buying Gambler after the first few turns. It's definitely an early game card.

As an early game card, I don't find Gambler to have a stronger effect than, say, Masquerade or other good cost 3 openers that have a bit of trashing. And I think its effect should be stronger than a Masquerade, since you're only going to get to play Gambler a few times before you're "forced" to trash it.

It also doesn't "feel" like a Gambling card, since the only gamble is whether or not it will get trashed. I usually think of gambling in association with a chance to make a lot of money, and getting the silver or other (fairly early-game) buy that I don't want to trash just isn't that big of a reward.

Quote
Hopefully Inventor is not too powerful.

I don't think it is too powerful. Probably similar strength to Cathedral (or a bit less), and it works well with money (like Smithy), but is more helpful near the end of the game, where Cathedral is a bit better earlier on.

Quote
Maybe Surveyor is underpowered as is, though.

To beef Surveyor, how about gaining the card on top of your deck? It seems like it would be fair to get to play it next turn, since you don't get to play it this turn as you have to discard it. You also might want to bump the cost up to 4 with that change since it might compare too favorably to Mint, for instance.

« Last Edit: April 10, 2012, 09:05:53 pm by Thanar »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #31 on: May 04, 2012, 08:03:54 pm »
+1

Sorry I didn't respond to this for so long! I got distracted by Legend of Grimrock and only recently got back to updating this set. I actually wrote most of this post weeks ago but didn't actually submit it. The parts that I've just written today are marked with 'UPDATE'.

We used the version that gave one Cathedral token when gaining it, and the trashing was definitely used in every case. I don't think the card is too powerful. I think it is just a solid card and some of the other cards might not be powerful enough. It definitely works well with a money-based strategy, similar to how Courtyard works well with money.

I was trying to figure out an easy way to allow the purchasing of additional Cathedral tokens for more money when you buy the Cathedral (i.e. spend another coin (or two?) when purchasing the Cathedral to get another token with it). It could make for an interesting choice between getting a Gold at 6 or getting a Cathedral with 2 trash tokens... Might be worth trying.

Hmm, I'm not sure I'm too gung-ho about allowing extra tokens for additional cash. I don't want Cathedral to get much more wordy or complex than it already is. It sounds like a good idea for a card in general, though.

Quote
I failed to gain a Gold with it when I played it. I think that happened at least one other time. The problem is that if you fail to get a gold with it, it is a significant setback, since it is a one-shot card that costs four and is then gone. To me it was more of a gamble than Gambler (bigger gain when you succeed, bigger loss when you fail). Perhaps make the self-trashing conditional on guessing correctly?

We also didn't think that it lived up to its name, since trashing one card from the supply doesn't significantly affect the supply. Also, it is rare that any one player would buy very many of them, since its main use is to get a Gold earlier on in the game and its utility decreases later on (plus it can be a bit harder to guess the Kingdom card later on).

You could change the text below the line to read "When you buy this or trash this..." so that you get two opportunities to trash from the supply per Monopoly, rather than one.

I really love these ideas. I think the trashing being conditional on a correct guess is a winner for sure. I also like the 'When you buy or trash this' idea, except if I phrase it that way, you'd be able to trash the entire Monopoly pile when you bought your first Monopoly. I'll try to phrase it another way such that you can trash more than one card per Monopoly bought. Perhaps 'When you buy this or play it', like Noble Brigand. I may give the card a dramatic overhaul.

Quote
I agree that the action effect of Clerk is not very good/interesting. Perhaps you could also let the person choose to leave one of the three cards on top of the deck? It seems kind of thematic, shuffling papers around on a desk, from the inbox to the outbox...

Yeah, I was trying to keep the theme a bit in mind when designing the action portion, more to give me ideas than anything. Although once I find an effect I like, I can easily change the name and art to match.

The real issue is that I basically need the action effect to be interesting, unique, situationally useful, and to fit on two or three lines, because the reaction effect takes up most of the space on the card. That's a pretty tall order.

UPDATE: I've decided that trying to make Clerk a balanced $2 card is too difficult. I've decided to bump its cost and I've thought up a more unique ability for it. Since its cost is now higher, I feel better about changing the reaction to allow an unlimited number of cards to be trashed.

Clerk
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 4
Gain a Silver. Look through your discard pile and put a card from it on top of your deck.
------------------------------------------------------------
When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash any number of cards from your hand.

I'm going to playtest this version. I'll post later with my findings.

Quote
As an early game card, I don't find Gambler to have a stronger effect than, say, Masquerade or other good cost 3 openers that have a bit of trashing. And I think its effect should be stronger than a Masquerade, since you're only going to get to play Gambler a few times before you're "forced" to trash it.

It also doesn't "feel" like a Gambling card, since the only gamble is whether or not it will get trashed. I usually think of gambling in association with a chance to make a lot of money, and getting the silver or other (fairly early-game) buy that I don't want to trash just isn't that big of a reward.

Yeah, I'll admit it's ironic that Gambler is one of the 'safest' cards to buy. Thematically, the idea is that you're giving him stuff from your Kingdom to gamble away. Usually he loses (which is what you want), but eventually he 'wins'.

The big thing that Gambler has over Masquerade is its +1 Action. So it's really more comparable to Lookout, Spice Merchant, or even Loan. So opening Masquerade/Silver is way better than Gambler/Silver, but Gambler/Militia or Gambler/Monument should net you better results.

Quote
To beef Surveyor, how about gaining the card on top of your deck? It seems like it would be fair to get to play it next turn, since you don't get to play it this turn as you have to discard it. You also might want to bump the cost up to 4 with that change since it might compare too favorably to Mint, for instance.

I'd also considered this option. My idea was actually to put the revealed card back onto your deck instead of gaining the new card onto your deck, but they amount to the same thing unless the Supply pile for the card is empty, in which case you probably wouldn't reveal a card anyhow.

UPDATE: Instead of changing how the card works, I've decided to drop Surveyor's cost from $3 to $2. I think it'll be much more palatable at the lower price point. It's the kind of card you'd be happy to pick up with an extra buy and a couple of extra coins.

UPDATE: Also, I've decided to try Fund out at $5 and without the 'discard your hand' bit. Even I was forgetting to discard my hand every time I played it. It'll work a lot differently, since before it specifically prevented mega-turns and now you pretty much need one in order for them to really shine. I'm not a big fan of mega-turn-based decks, but I know some people are, and the card's wording is much simpler this way.
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6020
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #32 on: May 17, 2012, 10:49:37 am »
+1

These are amazing cards.  I love them!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #33 on: May 18, 2012, 12:00:01 am »
+2

These are amazing cards.  I love them!

Wow! With that vote of confidence, I'm starting to think this expansion may be close to completion. I'd still like to playtest the cards a bit more, but pretty soon I'll finalize it and post it on BGG for wider consumption.
Logged

aestrivex

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
    • socionics workshop
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #34 on: May 19, 2012, 12:43:58 am »
+1

I like the set.  I really like fund, cathedral, and barracks.  I have a couple of balancing comments.

I'm not sure why aqueduct costs 4 and not 3.  It is not clear to me anyway that the effect of aqueduct is more powerful than tunnel.  Probably this is a very minor point because the number of situations in which you would actually want to buy aqueduct in most games is limited to endgame, and in those situations rarely does the difference between a 3-cost victory card and a 4-cost victory card matter.  However this could come up in the context of a gardens/silk rush, in which case aqueduct is more reasonably costed and much more useful at 3. (unless you argue that its one time effect is so powerful that it automatically merits 4 -- but this strikes me as a weak argument).

Inventor is correctly costed at 5 since it is strictly better than smithy.  That said, it seems a somewhat weak 5.  I realize that you have been twiddling with inventor but I'm not sure it "fits" quite yet.  As you know 5s are the premier level of actions in dominion.  This card is something I would envision buying probably only if a) i need drawing power and there is no other viable alternative in the spread or b) by chance if i hit 5 and there is nothing else that i really want.  Its remodel effect is potentially helpful, but that you can only use it once makes it exclusively an endgame card.  That means that if there are other drawers at 5 I would never buy this thing -- i would take rabble over inventor probably 100% of the time and i think rabble's attack is very weak.

I think barracks could option into a village, but that it is fine as it is.  The exact effect of the option seems very unimportant to balancing it, because the real point of the card is the ability to just play an attack from your deck.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #35 on: May 19, 2012, 02:26:11 am »
+1

I'm not sure why aqueduct costs 4 and not 3.  It is not clear to me anyway that the effect of aqueduct is more powerful than tunnel.  Probably this is a very minor point because the number of situations in which you would actually want to buy aqueduct in most games is limited to endgame, and in those situations rarely does the difference between a 3-cost victory card and a 4-cost victory card matter.  However this could come up in the context of a gardens/silk rush, in which case aqueduct is more reasonably costed and much more useful at 3. (unless you argue that its one time effect is so powerful that it automatically merits 4 -- but this strikes me as a weak argument).

Well, the comparison between Tunnel and Aqueduct is misleading. You generally buy Tunnel for one of two things. First, you can buy it in the endgame when you have $3 or $4. At that point, it might as well just be a Victory card worth 2 VP. Even if you happen to use the reaction portion before the game ends, you probably won't be cycling back around to the Gold. Will I pay $3 just for a vanilla Victory card worth 2VP? Of course. It beats buying an Estate.

Second, you can buy it at the start of the game and try to use its reaction as much as possible. That's a fairly big risk. You're buying a card that's going to hurt your economy if you can't get it to fire, when you could have bought a Silver. You get 2 VP to compensate, but you don't see that benefit for a long time and it's rather paltry compared to your potential loss of momentum. So, would I pay $3 for a pure Reaction card that gained me Gold on discard? Given the right helper cards, I definitely would.

It seems like a card that combines these two $3 effects should be worth more than $3. But the fact that you use one portion of the card during the beginning and mid-game and the other only at the end means that the total can cost less than the sum of its parts.

Aqueduct, on the other hand, is almost always an endgame card. If you compare it to Tunnel, you should be comparing it to endgame Tunnel. Endgame Tunnel is 2 VP for $3. Endgame Aqueduct is 2 VP plus a bonus for $4. Seems correct to me.

Quote
Inventor is correctly costed at 5 since it is strictly better than smithy.  That said, it seems a somewhat weak 5.  I realize that you have been twiddling with inventor but I'm not sure it "fits" quite yet.  As you know 5s are the premier level of actions in dominion.  This card is something I would envision buying probably only if a) i need drawing power and there is no other viable alternative in the spread or b) by chance if i hit 5 and there is nothing else that i really want.  Its remodel effect is potentially helpful, but that you can only use it once makes it exclusively an endgame card.  That means that if there are other drawers at 5 I would never buy this thing -- i would take rabble over inventor probably 100% of the time and i think rabble's attack is very weak.

Now that I've improved Clerk and replaced Monopoly with Boycott, Inventor has become the card in this set that I'm least happy with. I agree that as an engine component, it's the worst of the card drawers. I was hoping that its endgame remodeling utility would be enough to justify that. Perhaps I was wrong. It's certainly the card in the set that I find the least interesting and that I'm most willing to change at this point. I'll try to brainstorm some ideas for it.

Quote
I think barracks could option into a village, but that it is fine as it is.  The exact effect of the option seems very unimportant to balancing it, because the real point of the card is the ability to just play an attack from your deck.

Yes. The idea was that if you had other terminal Actions in your hand, you'd choose the Village-like effect. If not, you'd dig for an Attack card. In reality it shows up in your hand with just one other Action a lot of the time, a la Shanty Town. I'm OK with this, at least for now. I'm willing to alter the non-Attack option, but I'd like it not to be too wordy.

Thanks for your feedback!
« Last Edit: May 19, 2012, 02:29:26 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9146
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #36 on: May 19, 2012, 02:46:37 pm »
+1

Perhaps you could improve Inventor by making it a one-shot Expand instead of Remodel?  That might be too powerful though.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2012, 04:53:40 pm »
+1

Perhaps you could improve Inventor by making it a one-shot Expand instead of Remodel?  That might be too powerful though.

Well, that is certainly an option, although I think I'd rather improve the non-one-shot component of it to make it a more palatable purchase before the endgame. Perhaps I'll end up doing both.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2012, 05:14:15 pm »
+1

OK, here's a new, slightly altered version of Inventor:

Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard one and draw the rest. You may trash this card immediately. If you do, trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.
Logged

aestrivex

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
    • socionics workshop
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #39 on: May 20, 2012, 02:40:45 pm »
0

Aqueduct, on the other hand, is almost always an endgame card. If you compare it to Tunnel, you should be comparing it to endgame Tunnel. Endgame Tunnel is 2 VP for $3. Endgame Aqueduct is 2 VP plus a bonus for $4. Seems correct to me.

fair enough.
Logged

aestrivex

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
  • Respect: +4
    • View Profile
    • socionics workshop
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #40 on: May 20, 2012, 02:41:40 pm »
0

OK, here's a new, slightly altered version of Inventor:

Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Look at the top 4 cards of your deck. Discard one and draw the rest. You may trash this card immediately. If you do, trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing up to $2 more than it.

i think this is much better.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2012, 12:00:23 am »
+1

Sorry to necro my own thread, but I'm wrapping up this expansion soon and I'm looking for feedback on a few changes I've made.


The original version of Barracks was:

Barracks
Type: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +2 Actions; or reveal cards from your deck until you reavel an Attack card, discard the other revealed cards, and play that Attack card.

When you gain this, gain a Conscripts card (from the Conscripts pile).

One issue with this version was that the +2 Actions was pretty much never useful. A village that doesn't draw is pretty bad in general, but in a game with Curses being thrown around (a.k.a. most games with Barracks), it's nigh useless. Also, in games with no other Attack cards, you had to buy a crappy Barracks for each Conscripts. That's one useless card for you for each round of Curses you gave to your opponents. It's almost never worth it.

So here's the new version, which keeps the core mechanics the same while dramatically changing how it plays.

Barracks
Type: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Choose one: gain a Conscripts card (from the Conscripts pile); or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, put that Attack card into your hand, and discard the other revealed cards.

So far I really like this version. It seems to play quite differently depending on whether there are other Attack cards available or not, but in both cases there are interesting tactical decisions to be made.


After about 4 wildly different iterations of Inventor, I've finally returned to a version very similar to my original idea for the card (which predates this thread).

Inventor
Type: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and set this card aside on your Inventor mat.

At the start of your turn, you may remove this from your Inventor mat and put it into your hand.

This may not seem like it could be worth $5, but with smart play, you can really get a lot out of it. Just off the top of my head, here are some uses for it:

1. If you've got a Village/Inventor engine and you know that using your last action to play Inventor will probably result in drawing a bunch of dead Action cards, you can instead save it for the next turn you have a Village in hand.
2. In a big money deck, you can save it if you already have enough coins in hand to buy whatever card you want to buy, especially if you don't want to trigger a reshuffle.
3. If you're building a mega-turn deck, you can buy Inventors and put them all onto your mat as they come up, then at the beginning of your last turn, put them all into your hand, giving you a huge initial handsize increase.
4. With Throne Room, you can use the first play of Inventor to draw 3 cards, then if you drew an Action and/or you have enough money in hand, you can play it again for +1 Action and set it aside.


I'm thinking of nerfing Cathedral. It's a really strong big money enabler as it stands, on par with Wharf. I'm considering having it trash 2 cards from your hand rather than the top 2 cards of your deck when you spend a token. Or maybe that wouldn't even be a nerf, depending on what stage of the game you're at. Any opinions on this would be greatly appreciated.


Finally, I've replaced all of the dull-brown coin symbols on the cards with more authentic bright yellow versions.

I'm on the home stretch with this set and I want it to be the best it can be. Thanks in advance for any feedback!
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 12:06:12 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8133
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9492
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #42 on: August 02, 2012, 11:15:49 am »
+2

Well done.  In Mill Town, you've finally created a card that would make me want a Counting House.
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Ozle

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3625
  • Sorry, this text is personal.
  • Respect: +3348
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #43 on: August 02, 2012, 01:10:47 pm »
+1

These are all really good!
Logged
Try the Ozle Google Map Challenge!
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=7466.0

Sullying players Enjoyment of Innovation since 2013 Apparently!

PigFiend

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #44 on: August 05, 2012, 04:10:09 pm »
0

Really cool theme and very polished presentation. Good job!

Clerk's reaction seems very very powerful. If you start Chapel, you might trash four cards and buy a Silver over turns 3 and 4. Clerk can get that all accomplished in one hand! And the Silver will be on top of the deck! I'm not saying that's bad necessarily, for a card to scare people away from Sea Hag.

Mill Town and Aqueduct are my kind of cards. I'd love to play with them. Can you imagine this turn 3?
Hand: 2 Coppers, Estate, Mill Town, Watchtower.
Mill Town to draw a Copper. Discard the Estate, reveal 3 Coppers to gain a Mill Town that goes on top of the deck via Watchtower.
Watchtower to draw three cards, maybe Mill Town, Copper, Estate.
Mill Town to draw a Copper. Discard the Estate. Reveal 5 Coppers to gain a nasty 5.

On subsequent turns, Mill Towning to gain an Aqueduct (that you might trash with WT) to make sure what you'll get from WTing is just Mill Towns and Coppers is wild. Very exciting!
Logged

PigFiend

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 32
  • Respect: +6
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #45 on: August 05, 2012, 04:39:51 pm »
+1

Hmm. Also, Cathedral big money looks really really really powerful. It's a one-time trasher (that is almost guaranteed to blow 2 Estates) and the best of both worlds in Smithy and Courtyard. A Cathedral - Nothing start is likely super strong.

Can you imagine Cathedral with Mint? Cathedral would likely set up a turn with 6 Coppers to buy Mint. Later on it would throw Mint plus Silver/Gold/etc back on top.
Logged

engineer

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 147
  • Respect: +57
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #46 on: August 05, 2012, 04:41:43 pm »
+1

I haven't had a chance to play with any of these cards, but they certainly look great.  I like your designs -- novel, but not unnecessarily complex.

Also, the artwork is incredible.  Where did you get it? Did somebody on the forum make those pictures for you?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #47 on: August 13, 2012, 11:55:33 am »
+1

Well done.  In Mill Town, you've finally created a card that would make me want a Counting House.

These are all really good!

I haven't had a chance to play with any of these cards, but they certainly look great.  I like your designs -- novel, but not unnecessarily complex.

Also, the artwork is incredible.  Where did you get it? Did somebody on the forum make those pictures for you?

Thanks! As for the artwork, I found it mostly through Google searches. Not all of it is in the public domain, but for a fan expansion that won't be published, I figured it wouldn't be a huge deal.

Clerk's reaction seems very very powerful. If you start Chapel, you might trash four cards and buy a Silver over turns 3 and 4. Clerk can get that all accomplished in one hand! And the Silver will be on top of the deck! I'm not saying that's bad necessarily, for a card to scare people away from Sea Hag.

Ah, you have a keen eye. Clerk does make buying Attacks on turns 1 and 2 riskier, but after that it's not really a big factor. The chance that you'll have a Clerk and four cards that you want to trash on turn 5 onwards is pretty slim and it only gets slimmer. So although I was also concerned about it, is hasn't turned out to be a problem in practice.

Hmm. Also, Cathedral big money looks really really really powerful. It's a one-time trasher (that is almost guaranteed to blow 2 Estates) and the best of both worlds in Smithy and Courtyard. A Cathedral - Nothing start is likely super strong.

You are correct, sir, and I'm going to tweak Cathedral again. I'm currently considering something like this:

Cathedral
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+4 Cards. Return 2 cards to the top of your deck. You may spend a Cathedral token. If you do, trash the top card of your deck and gain a card with the same cost.

When you gain this, take 2 Cathedral tokens.

I'm waiting for the rest of the Dark Ages reveal to make sure there isn't a card that's too similar to this effect. There are several other very minor tweaks I'm going to make to the cards at that time as well. (Gambler looks at your top card rather than revealing it. Conscripts gets returned to the Conscripts pile when played rather than being trashed, etc.)
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1782
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #48 on: August 14, 2012, 06:30:28 pm »
+1

I'm a big fan of this one, but Mill Town might run faster if you "reveal 3 or more Coppers from your hand and gain a card costing up to the number of Coppers revealed" since we wouldn't be stuck in the awkward analysis-paralysis of trying not to reveal too many or too few Coppers. Why can't Mill Town gain a card that costs $2, anyway?

Well, the reason that Mill Town can't gain $2 cards is that I was afraid that it would be too easy to run out piles with it. A hand with 3 Mill Towns and 2 Coppers could gain 4 Estates, after all. Now that I think about it, I see no real problem with the gaining being 'up to' the number of Coppers revealed as long as you still have to reveal at least 3 Coppers. I'll change the wording. I think I actually have to reword the card anyway, because as it's currently written, I think you could gain, say, a Familiar by revealing 3 Coppers.

First of all, nice mini-set utilizing the one-shot theme!

One thing I thought of when reading the cards:

I don't think your concern about gaining too many cards with Mill Town and running out piles should be limited to just $2 cards. I think Mill Town would be a go-to card a lot of the time.

For instance, have you played any Mill Town - Tactician - terminal draw games? Goal: get a a deck of 2 Tacticians, 8 Coppers, and as many Mill Towns and Smithies as possible (making sure #Smithies < # Mill Towns at all times). Mill Town's gain and your normal buy should accomplish this very quickly. Then double Tac and reveal 8 Coppers for Provinces. I played this solitaire for two games and exhaused the Province pile on turn 11 in game 1 and turn 10 in game 2. Contested, the Mill Town and Smithy pile would run out extremely quickly. 
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #49 on: August 15, 2012, 12:21:05 pm »
+1

I'm a big fan of this one, but Mill Town might run faster if you "reveal 3 or more Coppers from your hand and gain a card costing up to the number of Coppers revealed" since we wouldn't be stuck in the awkward analysis-paralysis of trying not to reveal too many or too few Coppers. Why can't Mill Town gain a card that costs $2, anyway?

Well, the reason that Mill Town can't gain $2 cards is that I was afraid that it would be too easy to run out piles with it. A hand with 3 Mill Towns and 2 Coppers could gain 4 Estates, after all. Now that I think about it, I see no real problem with the gaining being 'up to' the number of Coppers revealed as long as you still have to reveal at least 3 Coppers. I'll change the wording. I think I actually have to reword the card anyway, because as it's currently written, I think you could gain, say, a Familiar by revealing 3 Coppers.

First of all, nice mini-set utilizing the one-shot theme!

One thing I thought of when reading the cards:

I don't think your concern about gaining too many cards with Mill Town and running out piles should be limited to just $2 cards. I think Mill Town would be a go-to card a lot of the time.

For instance, have you played any Mill Town - Tactician - terminal draw games? Goal: get a a deck of 2 Tacticians, 8 Coppers, and as many Mill Towns and Smithies as possible (making sure #Smithies < # Mill Towns at all times). Mill Town's gain and your normal buy should accomplish this very quickly. Then double Tac and reveal 8 Coppers for Provinces. I played this solitaire for two games and exhaused the Province pile on turn 11 in game 1 and turn 10 in game 2. Contested, the Mill Town and Smithy pile would run out extremely quickly.

I think your point is extremely valid and clearly Tactician/Mill Town is a power combo. Probably it's even better than Tactician/Coppersmith or Tactician/Bank. That being said, it is just one combination and I'm not convinced that it's worth tweaking Mill Town over, when the card works quite well in general as it is. For one thing, even if all the players race for such a double-Tactician deck, I'm guessing the it might still be an interesting game. Even if it's not, at least it's short!

More importantly, there are several attacks that at least hamper that strategy. Junk-givers and discard-based attacks are probably the most effective, although concentrated trashing attacks might be viable as well.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1782
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #50 on: August 15, 2012, 01:10:50 pm »
+1

I was thinking about a couple of different ways to reign in Mill Town if you were inclined:

1) Put a clause in the text so that you cannot gain Mill Towns with Mill Towns (and remove the at least 3 Coppers clause) because my feeling is that more problems arise from quickly getting too many Mill Towns than running out a $2 pile.
OR
2) Change "discard a card" to "discard a Copper or reveal a hand without Coppers," reducing the power of multiple gains.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Finalized)
« Reply #51 on: August 15, 2012, 02:02:02 pm »
+1

I was thinking about a couple of different ways to reign in Mill Town if you were inclined:

1) Put a clause in the text so that you cannot gain Mill Towns with Mill Towns (and remove the at least 3 Coppers clause) because my feeling is that more problems arise from quickly getting too many Mill Towns than running out a $2 pile.
OR
2) Change "discard a card" to "discard a Copper or reveal a hand without Coppers," reducing the power of multiple gains.

Well, change 2 pretty much kills the card dead in any game without Tactician or Counting House. You'd pretty much never want it. So that's not a change I'm willing to make. I'll have to think about change 1. It's possible I can do something along those lines. I also might play a few games with Tactician and see how much of an issue I think it is.

Thanks for the feedback and ideas!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #52 on: December 09, 2012, 01:40:46 pm »
+2

I've completed my post-Dark Ages overhaul of Dominion: Enterprise. This is the third major iteration of this set and I decided to keep the same thread this time, rather than create a whole new one.

Here are the changes I've made:

Surveyor and Gambler received wording changes but are functionally the same. Gambler now has you look at the top card of your deck rather than revealing it, since the reveal wasn't necessary to keep you honest.

Boycott got bumped from +$2 to +$3 when played to give more incentive for going for it. I may also add a +1 Buy.

Mercenary got a name change to Enforcer because of the Dark Ages card with the same name.

I've replaced Aqueduct with Floodgate. They both fulfill the role of, "buy this to make your next hand better", but Floodgate is far more compelling and versatile.

Barracks lost the parentheses around "from the Conscripts pile". I jazzed up Conscripts itself to make it worth gaining when the Curses have run out. It used to just read, "+$2. Trash this card. Each other player gains a Curse." Now you get to choose two options from a list of four. Also, Barracks and Conscripts combo a bit better this way. If they collide, you can use Barracks to dig for another Attack card, then use Conscripts to give out a Curse (or whatever) and then play the other Attack card. Also, rather than Conscripts trashing itself, it now goes back to the Conscripts pile. Finally, the Conscripts pile is 16 cards, using up the remaining cards in the hypothetical 150-card box.

I'm a bit worried that Conscripts will still be too weak. It is a one-shot that you sacrifice quite a lot of time to acquire. I might try it with the '+$2' and 'gain a Silver' options replaced by '+$3' and 'gain a Gold', but that might not be necessary. Cursing is powerful as-is.

I've cut Cathedral from the set entirely. It was too similar to Courtyard and way too powerful for simple big money strategies. In its place I tried 3 different cards that I've posted to this forum, and for now I've settled on an updated version of Exchange. It still needs some more playtesting, but it's the card I like the best so far in this slot. I'd like to have a Remodel variant and it's also nice to have another pure one-shot in the set.

Fund has received another major overhaul. I pulled the cost reduction in favor of just having it produce +$4/+1 Buy once as its one-shot effect, deciding that wasn't too powerful for $5 after all. I also incorporated Cathedral's 'one-shot that doesn't leave your deck' idea into it. See, it's a Silver that you can use once for the extra cash and buy. Then it just reverts to a regular Silver. This was a way I could do this concept without using tokens, which I had to use for Cathedral. If possible, I'd like to have this set be free of extra components.

Inventor is almost functionally identical to its most recent iteration. Before you either drew 3 cards or +1 Action and set it aside on your Inventor mat, where you could pull it back to your hand at the beginning of any turn. I realized that this is pretty much the same as having it just return to your hand at the start of your next turn, since you could then just set it aside again at no penalty. That way it wouldn't need a mat, so I made the change.

Tax Collector lost its +1 Buy (which felt tacked on to me). That leaves the set with only one +Buy card (Fund), but I might be OK with that in a set with so much gaining. Also, the attack no longer hits cards costing $2. I think it needed that buff, but more playtesting could prove me wrong.

That's it! Thanks once again to everybody who has given feedback and suggestions. You've helped make this set as good as it is, and it's a set that I really enjoy playing. So, thanks again and thanks in advance for any future feedback!
« Last Edit: January 26, 2013, 12:13:58 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Bron

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #53 on: December 09, 2012, 04:07:45 pm »
+1

I just found out that maybe Exchange has a problematic wording: Trash this .... For each trashed card gain ...  Does this mean that I get $7 card?

One question: Isn't BigMoney + Inventor (where you always buy it at $5 and maybe sometimes at $6) very strong strategy?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #54 on: December 09, 2012, 04:10:53 pm »
+1

I just found out that maybe Exchange has a problematic wording: Trash this .... For each trashed card gain ...  Does this mean that I get $7 card?

Heh, good call. I may have to reword that.

Quote
One question: Isn't BigMoney + Inventor (where you always buy it at $5 and maybe sometimes at $6) very strong strategy?

Well, that's a good question. I'll run a test to find out. Thanks!
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #55 on: December 09, 2012, 04:17:23 pm »
+1

In Big Money I don't see Inventor being all *that* strong.  Catacombs seems quite a bit stronger, for instance.

Edit:  oh, I didn't notice that you get +1 action if you "haven" it.  yeah, it is seems rather strong now, since that prevents collisions. If you just have Inventor top deck itself along with the +1 action, then you would get a similar sense of saving it for later, but only if you don't continue drawing now.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2012, 04:20:07 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #56 on: December 09, 2012, 04:31:52 pm »
+1

It's not a statistically significant sample, but preliminary tests suggest that BigMoney/Inventor is way, way weaker than BigMoney/Envoy. Part of it is that Inventor costs $5, which is significantly more expensive than $4 and also means that you can't open Inventor/Silver. Another part of it is that, while Inventors in hand don't collide, any Inventors you draw dead are still dead. I'll run some more tests, but I'm not too worried at this point. It wouldn't surprise me if it ended up being weaker than BigMoney/Smithy on average.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #57 on: December 09, 2012, 04:35:54 pm »
+1

Well, I believe that the proper way to compare it with BM/Smithy is to buy one Smithy and then Inventors after that.  I think this hybrid should beat both BM/Smithy and BM/Inventor.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #58 on: December 09, 2012, 05:08:10 pm »
+1

Well, I believe that the proper way to compare it with BM/Smithy is to buy one Smithy and then Inventors after that.  I think this hybrid should beat both BM/Smithy and BM/Inventor.

Really? Why? That assumes that Smithy and Inventor are always going to be on the same board. Even if it ends up being a powerful combo, I don't think that says much about Inventor's power in a vacuum.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #59 on: December 09, 2012, 05:11:38 pm »
+1

Well, I believe that the proper way to compare it with BM/Smithy is to buy one Smithy and then Inventors after that.  I think this hybrid should beat both BM/Smithy and BM/Inventor.

Really? Why? That assumes that Smithy and Inventor are always going to be on the same board. Even if it ends up being a powerful combo, I don't think that says much about Inventor's power in a vacuum.

If BM/Smithy and BM/Inventor are competing against one another, it means both Smithy and Inventor are in the supply.  Unless one of the those BMs is Black Market.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

Bron

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
  • Respect: +11
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #60 on: December 09, 2012, 05:26:49 pm »
+1

But often people would say that if X beats Y then X fares better against Z then Y would. This is often not true but I think that it is a reasonable starting point. So if you want to compare BM+Inventor against some (average) strategy X you can do BM+Inventor vs. BM+Smithy and extrapolate from your "intuitive" knowledge of BM+Smithy. In this sense it is reasonable to prohibit BM+Inventor from buying Smithy since against X it need not be available.

Does this make any sense?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #61 on: December 09, 2012, 05:43:23 pm »
+1

Yeah, the speed of BM+X is more of a benchmark than anything. How fast can it get to 4 Provinces, 5 Provinces, 8 Provinces, etc. The worry here is that BM+Inventor is too powerful, which is concerning because it could make for really boring games where everyone just plays that strategy. However, if I determine that BM+Inventor is no more powerful than BM+Smithy or BM+Envoy, then I'm OK with it. Smithy+Inventor is starting to get into combo territory, and I don't have any issues with that.
Logged

brokoli

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
  • Respect: +772
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #62 on: December 10, 2012, 07:08:14 am »
+1

I think this is really the first time I like fan made cards other than mine !  :D
Well, not all cards, but Mill town, Floodgate and inventor seems especially promising. Good job !
EDIT : Oh, sorry I forgot Boycott. I think it's even my favourite of your set ! :)
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 10:22:15 am by brokoli »
Logged

Qvist

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2395
  • Shuffle iT Username: Qvist
  • Respect: +4067
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #63 on: December 10, 2012, 07:45:13 am »
+2

I don't think Inventor+BM is too strong. It's somewhat similar to Library+BM, but reverse. 2 Libraries in hand could collide but you can't draw Libraries dead. 2 Inventors in hand can't collide, but you can draw them dead.

Polatrite

  • Herbalist
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7
  • Respect: +3
    • View Profile
    • My Portfolio
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #64 on: December 10, 2012, 01:34:27 pm »
+2

I played with Inventor several times in my group, and basically any board with +2 actions would yield Inventor extremely powerful, such that it was almost a better investment than some of the best $5s in the game.

I think the power level of the card could be adjusted by having the Inventor set back on top of your deck instead of off to the side, because basically as written you wind up with a card advantage on the following turn (6 cards instead of 5) and you can continue to set it aside forever at no opportunity cost whatsoever if you don't get the +actions draw that you need.
Logged

ShinKyo

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #65 on: December 10, 2012, 05:54:02 pm »
+1

What a wonderful Fan-Expansion! :D Really like the new ideas which seams all well-thought-out. Professional work!
I have a Mod-Suggestion for the Inventor which obviously is a bit too strong for some players.
This would limit the set-aside-flood (inpired by the wonderful Shanty Town):
What would you think of this?
Quote
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
or
+3 Cards
So it's much more difficult to set aside more as one Inventor but it's still possible if you have enough actions or you can play some Inventors before with a 'village' which certainly increase the chance of holding to many of it in hand. The annoying case of holding only one Inventor in hand without 'villages' gives you the set-aside-function and the action for another action card in hand (similar to Shanty Town without action cards in hand).
« Last Edit: December 10, 2012, 06:00:10 pm by ShinKyo »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #66 on: December 10, 2012, 10:34:47 pm »
+1

Haven't had a chance to read through the whole thread, so not sure if this has been discussed... just wondering if you've had a chance to test these along side Graverobber or Rogue. It seems to me that one-shots in general may be more powerful when there is the possibility of getting them back.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

Archetype

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 985
  • Suffers from Fancy Play Syndrom
  • Respect: +685
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #67 on: December 10, 2012, 10:52:17 pm »
+1

I suggest you change up Clerk a bit, the action part is a bit too similar to Scavenger. Maybe it's fine though.

Still love your cards LastFootnote, nice job!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #68 on: December 11, 2012, 12:50:32 am »
+1

I played with Inventor several times in my group, and basically any board with +2 actions would yield Inventor extremely powerful, such that it was almost a better investment than some of the best $5s in the game.

I think the power level of the card could be adjusted by having the Inventor set back on top of your deck instead of off to the side, because basically as written you wind up with a card advantage on the following turn (6 cards instead of 5) and you can continue to set it aside forever at no opportunity cost whatsoever if you don't get the +actions draw that you need.

Hey, welcome to the forums! Thanks for testing Inventor! I might test it a bit more in its current form, but now that I've gotten feedback from multiple people about it being too powerful, I'm thinking seriously about tweaking it. Since you've tested it, your feedback is particularly valuable, so if you have anything else to add concerning Inventor, or if you decide to test any of my other cards, please let me know!

What would you think of this?
Quote
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
or
+3 Cards
So it's much more difficult to set aside more as one Inventor but it's still possible if you have enough actions or you can play some Inventors before with a 'village' which certainly increase the chance of holding to many of it in hand. The annoying case of holding only one Inventor in hand without 'villages' gives you the set-aside-function and the action for another action card in hand (similar to Shanty Town without action cards in hand).

I appreciate the suggestion! However, I'm worried that it's a bit confusing and I can't think of a rewording that would really simplify it. However, I will definitely keep it on the table as an option.

Currently, I'm considering two other ways to nerf the card.

Option 1 (Polatrite's suggestion):
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and put this on top of your deck.

Option 2:
Choose one: +3 Cards; or set this aside, returning it to your hand at the start of your next turn.

Right now I'm leaning strongly toward Polatrite's version. It has some weirdness in that you could play the same Inventor multiple times in a turn, but now that I think about it, Procession/Fortress does that too. With that change, multiple Inventors can collide, because if you put one back on your deck, you'll just draw it dead with the other one. However, you could put them both back and hope there's a village in the three other cards you draw next turn. The more I think about it, the more I like the strategy it could create. I just hope it's still strong enough to be a decent $5 card with this nerf.

Haven't had a chance to read through the whole thread, so not sure if this has been discussed... just wondering if you've had a chance to test these along side Graverobber or Rogue. It seems to me that one-shots in general may be more powerful when there is the possibility of getting them back.

I haven't tested those combinations yet, but they sound like fun! I definitely think that Graverobber (and to a lesser extent Rogue) combo well with one-shots, although the pedant in me would argue that those cards don't make one-shots more powerful. Rather, one-shots make those cards more powerful because they make it far more likely that there's something worthwhile in the trash. But that's just me nitpicking. Your point is perfectly valid.

I suggest you change up Clerk a bit, the action part is a bit too similar to Scavenger. Maybe it's fine though.

*sigh*
…You're probably right. It's just a shame because it took so long for me to come up with Clerk's top half. It's an effect that doesn't really change in utility with the number of cards in your hand, which is nice on a reaction that can leave you with a very small hand. Although it might be nice to have that reaction on a card that doesn't fill your deck with Silver, which tends to get in the way of the trashing.

On a side note, I do think it's interesting how Donald and I came up with different ways to make sure the 'pull a card from your discard' effect didn't fail.

Anyhow, I'm thinking of replacing the top half with a card idea I came up with a while ago, which I called Valet.

Clerk/Valet
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. For each one, in either order, choose one: draw it; or +$1 and put it back.

When another player plays an Attack, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash any number of cards from your hand.

How does that strike you? Now that it has the trashing reaction, it's even more like a variation of Steward. The +Cards and +Coins part is much more versatile, but it can only trash when an Attack is played. Weird.

Anyhow, thanks again everybody for your encouragement and feedback!
Logged

ShinKyo

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #69 on: December 11, 2012, 05:50:29 am »
+1


What would you think of this?
Quote
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
or
+3 Cards
So it's much more difficult to set aside more as one Inventor but it's still possible if you have enough actions or you can play some Inventors before with a 'village' which certainly increase the chance of holding to many of it in hand. The annoying case of holding only one Inventor in hand without 'villages' gives you the set-aside-function and the action for another action card in hand (similar to Shanty Town without action cards in hand).

I appreciate the suggestion! However, I'm worried that it's a bit confusing and I can't think of a rewording that would really simplify it. However, I will definitely keep it on the table as an option.

Currently, I'm considering two other ways to nerf the card.

Option 1 (Polatrite's suggestion):
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and put this on top of your deck.

Option 2:
Choose one: +3 Cards; or set this aside, returning it to your hand at the start of your next turn.

Right now I'm leaning strongly toward Polatrite's version. It has some weirdness in that you could play the same Inventor multiple times in a turn, but now that I think about it, Procession/Fortress does that too. With that change, multiple Inventors can collide, because if you put one back on your deck, you'll just draw it dead with the other one. However, you could put them both back and hope there's a village in the three other cards you draw next turn. The more I think about it, the more I like the strategy it could create. I just hope it's still strong enough to be a decent $5 card with this nerf.
Are you really worried, my version would be a bit confusing? Do you mean it serious? I mean Possession with Dark Ages cards could be very confusing but to look if there is another Inventor in hand isn't more confusing as a Shanty Town.
There would be only four different possibilities:
1. You have only one Inventor and no other action card in hand. You can play it, and possibly draw cards dead or you can reveal your hand (no other Inventor there) set the card aside und get the action back which has sadly no use (only for Diadem maybe ;) )
2. Same as 1. but you have another action card in hand and can play it.
3. You have more than one Inventor in hand and also other action cards. You can choose +3 cards or set only one Inventor aside and cannot play another action card or you can think if it's more worthwhile to play another action card first.
4. Same as 3. but only Inventors in hand. You can set aside only one Inventor and cannot play another. Or play an Inventor like a Smithy.

I think this is really easy and it would be fun to think about playing it mostly productive. This would definitly be a 5 cost card cause the possibility to set aside more than one is still there and you can get more than 5 cards at beginning of your turn.
At Polatrite's version I don't know why I should put more than one or two of it on top of my deck. It more and more decreases the chance of getting it together with a 'village'. If there isn't a way to get more than 1 action then a carddraw after putting Inventors on top would make absolutly no sense and no fun. For example Inventor and CanTrip in hand. The only wise would be playing the CanTrip first then the Inventor to put it on top (otherwise draw dead problem). The other way around you would draw the Inventor instead of a new card, not a good move. The costs for this version would probably be at 4.5, a weak 5. Option 2 would also be too weak and not really fun.
Hope to see your expansion someday as real cards from RGG. After Donald has finished his series maybe an official Fan-Expansion existing of FanCard-Contests winner cards could come out. Perhaps Donald was asked something like that before?
« Last Edit: December 11, 2012, 05:54:12 am by ShinKyo »
Logged

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1881
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #70 on: December 11, 2012, 09:59:51 am »
+1

Anyhow, I'm thinking of replacing the top half with a card idea I came up with a while ago, which I called Valet.

Clerk/Valet
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. For each one, in either order, choose one: draw it; or +$1 and put it back.

When another player plays an Attack, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash any number of cards from your hand.

How does that strike you? Now that it has the trashing reaction, it's even more like a variation of Steward. The +Cards and +Coins part is much more versatile, but it can only trash when an Attack is played. Weird.

Anyhow, thanks again everybody for your encouragement and feedback!

I'm concerned that this reaction is too strong. The problem with very strong attack reactions is you having this makes me not want to buy attacks in the first place, and then your cool reaction ability never happens, so you won't want to buy this card.
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #71 on: December 11, 2012, 11:33:35 am »
+1

I don't think Clerk needs to have its ability changed from "Gain a Silver. TopDeck a discarded card". If anything, a discard should be required when using the trash any number reaction.

I had a trash reaction in mind for a card; I didn't use it because I had seen Clerk, but that reaction was set itself aside and 1 trash. It got your hand size down to 3 for Militia, Ghost Ship, etc.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #72 on: December 11, 2012, 12:08:51 pm »
+1

Are you really worried, my version would be a bit confusing? Do you mean it serious? I mean Possession with Dark Ages cards could be very confusing but to look if there is another Inventor in hand isn't more confusing as a Shanty Town.
There would be only four different possibilities:
1. You have only one Inventor and no other action card in hand. You can play it, and possibly draw cards dead or you can reveal your hand (no other Inventor there) set the card aside und get the action back which has sadly no use (only for Diadem maybe ;) )
2. Same as 1. but you have another action card in hand and can play it.
3. You have more than one Inventor in hand and also other action cards. You can choose +3 cards or set only one Inventor aside and cannot play another action card or you can think if it's more worthwhile to play another action card first.
4. Same as 3. but only Inventors in hand. You can set aside only one Inventor and cannot play another. Or play an Inventor like a Smithy.

I think this is really easy and it would be fun to think about playing it mostly productive. This would definitly be a 5 cost card cause the possibility to set aside more than one is still there and you can get more than 5 cards at beginning of your turn.
At Polatrite's version I don't know why I should put more than one or two of it on top of my deck. It more and more decreases the chance of getting it together with a 'village'. If there isn't a way to get more than 1 action then a carddraw after putting Inventors on top would make absolutly no sense and no fun. For example Inventor and CanTrip in hand. The only wise would be playing the CanTrip first then the Inventor to put it on top (otherwise draw dead problem). The other way around you would draw the Inventor instead of a new card, not a good move. The costs for this version would probably be at 4.5, a weak 5. Option 2 would also be too weak and not really fun.

Maybe 'confusing' is the wrong word. It's more like, if a card gives you two options, it seems…weird to me that if you choose one option, you then reveal your hand and it's like, "Oops! You can't do that option after all." I mean I understand how the card works. If you have another Inventor in your hand, you just wouldn't choose that option. Like if there are no other Action cards in your hand, you wouldn't play Gravedigger for the trash-and-gain option. So it's not unprecedented. It just seems awkward to me. I think 'awkward' is a better word for how I feel about it than 'confusing'.

Actually, now that I look at the card and your description again, I realize that I didn't understand how it worked. So if you choose the set aside option and reveal an Inventor, you still set it aside, but you don't get the +1 Action? It wasn't clear to me which parts of the instructions would happen under which circumstances.

I really appreciate the idea, don't get me wrong. It's possible that the card will end up incorporating this idea. I just have concerns about it.

Anyhow, I'm thinking of replacing the top half with a card idea I came up with a while ago, which I called Valet.

Clerk/Valet
Types: Action
Cost: $4
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck. For each one, in either order, choose one: draw it; or +$1 and put it back.

When another player plays an Attack, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash any number of cards from your hand.

How does that strike you? Now that it has the trashing reaction, it's even more like a variation of Steward. The +Cards and +Coins part is much more versatile, but it can only trash when an Attack is played. Weird.

Anyhow, thanks again everybody for your encouragement and feedback!

I'm concerned that this reaction is too strong. The problem with very strong attack reactions is you having this makes me not want to buy attacks in the first place, and then your cool reaction ability never happens, so you won't want to buy this card.

Well, I can't speak for the reaction ability with the new top half of the card; I haven't tested that yet. However, the reaction ability seemed fine alongside the 'gain a Silver' top half. It does discourage buying Attacks on turns 1 and 2, but really that's about it. After that, the chance that you'll get it in hand with more than one or two cards you want to trash is pretty slim. Moreover, you get the most out of trashing a bunch of cards when you're building an engine. And with a bunch of Silver in your deck, that becomes less practical. All that being said…

I don't think Clerk needs to have its ability changed from "Gain a Silver. TopDeck a discarded card". If anything, a discard should be required when using the trash any number reaction.

I had a trash reaction in mind for a card; I didn't use it because I had seen Clerk, but that reaction was set itself aside and 1 trash. It got your hand size down to 3 for Militia, Ghost Ship, etc.

The reason I've stuck with revealing the card rather than discarding/setting aside is that I wanted Clerk to have the ability to trash itself once it outlived its utility. That being said, I don't think it's ever happened in a real game, so I should probably let go of that idea. I really like your version of the reaction. Would it be OK if I adopted it? I'd at least like to test it out.

As far as changing the top goes, I guess it wouldn't be the end of the world to leave it the way it is and have it be similar to Scavenger. It's less unique than it was, but it certainly plays differently.
Logged

ShinKyo

  • Steward
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
  • Respect: +13
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #73 on: December 11, 2012, 01:27:22 pm »
+1

Maybe 'confusing' is the wrong word. It's more like, if a card gives you two options, it seems…weird to me that if you choose one option, you then reveal your hand and it's like, "Oops! You can't do that option after all." I mean I understand how the card works. If you have another Inventor in your hand, you just wouldn't choose that option. Like if there are no other Action cards in your hand, you wouldn't play Gravedigger for the trash-and-gain option. So it's not unprecedented. It just seems awkward to me. I think 'awkward' is a better word for how I feel about it than 'confusing'.

Actually, now that I look at the card and your description again, I realize that I didn't understand how it worked. So if you choose the set aside option and reveal an Inventor, you still set it aside, but you don't get the +1 Action? It wasn't clear to me which parts of the instructions would happen under which circumstances.

I really appreciate the idea, don't get me wrong. It's possible that the card will end up incorporating this idea. I just have concerns about it.
Now you understand it.  8) I think the card text cannot be clearer. If there is a 'Choose one' all until the 'or' is the first option, then the rest until the next 'or' is the second option and so on. If you cannot set aside one Inventor if there are other Inventors in hand it would be really dumb. Such a thing I wouldn't put on a card. Trust me, I have some experience in card design. I only want to limit the too easy way to put all aside for the next turn without thinking.

Edit: Ah, you probably have missed the important point after the +1 Action. So the wording again:
Code: [Select]
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action.
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
or
+3 Cards
Maybe it's better to switch at the first option like this:
Code: [Select]
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action.
or
+3 Cards
or completely switch the options:
Code: [Select]
Inventor - Action - Cost: 5 Coins
Choose one:
+3 Cards
or
Set this card aside, returning it to your hand of the start of your next turn.
Reveal your hand. If you have no Inventor in hand: +1 Action.
But then someone maybe could think that the reveal counts for both options.

« Last Edit: December 12, 2012, 04:23:29 am by ShinKyo »
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #74 on: December 12, 2012, 12:40:29 am »
+1

Would it be OK if I adopted it? I'd at least like to test it out.

You are more than welcome to. Happy to help.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #75 on: January 27, 2013, 03:03:40 pm »
+3

I've finally gotten a bit more playtesting in with the cards, and I've made a few tweaks.

First of all, the wording on Exchange is fixed so that it doesn't count itself as a 'trashed card' for the purposes of gaining cards. (Thanks, Bron!) The wording of Enforcer has been simplified, but it's functionally the same.

Conscripts has had its '+$2' and 'gain a Silver' options replaced with '+$3' and 'gain a Gold'. It turns out this is not too powerful after all, since Conscripts is a one-shot that you sacrifice a fair bit of time to get your hands on.

I'm testing a new version of Clerk (I'm trying to differentiate it from Scavenger), but I'm not sure I'm happy with it yet. It digs for an Action to leave on top, and my wife used it and some Tunnels to empty the Gold pile and win handily. I probably didn't play my best, but it seems too cheap for a Tunnel enabler that's even better than Young Witch. We'll see how that shakes out.

The biggest reason I'm posting, though, is to get feedback on my latest version of Inventor. The most recent version was this:

Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards; or +1 Action and set this card aside, returning it to your hand at the start of your next turn.

There were concerns that it was too powerful (both for BM-strategies and engines) and that the setting aside meant that there was no opportunity cost for repeatedly setting it aside.

To remedy these issues, it was suggested that it put itself back on top of the deck instead. I didn't like this exact solution because it meant that two Inventors in hand always collided. Putting one back on your deck just meant drawing it dead with the other one. Putting both back on your deck meant getting only 3 other cards in your next hand to get a Village.

The new versions looks like this:

Inventor
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Choose one: +3 Cards and +1 Buy; or +1 Action and put this anywhere in your deck.

So it's never an 'extra' card in hand, like it would be if you set it aside. But if you draw two Inventors in a hand, you can play one, put it four cards down in your deck, and play the other one for +3 Cards. Of course, you can't do this if you don't have at least three cards in your deck, so it's not a guaranteed solution. Also, I gave it an extra buy, having removed the +1 Buy from Tax Collector. I think it'll give it more utility in more situations without boosting its power too much.

I'm going to test it more, of course. I'm hoping this will be the last iteration of the card. If you have an opinion about the new version, I'd love to hear it!
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 03:33:38 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

theory

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3593
  • Respect: +6020
    • View Profile
    • Dominion Strategy
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #76 on: January 27, 2013, 03:09:28 pm »
+1

When placing it "anywhere" in your deck, does that mean you get to see your deck?
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #77 on: January 27, 2013, 03:10:25 pm »
+1

When placing it "anywhere" in your deck, does that mean you get to see your deck?

No, it works similarly to Stash. But since you know where the Inventor is when you're placing it, it doesn't need a different back.

EDIT: A little more background info: at first I was testing a version that said, "+1 Action and put this on the top or bottom of your deck." Then I realized, why not let you put it anywhere? The answer to that question is AP, but I'm hoping that's not going to turn out to be an issue. The 'anywhere in your deck' wording is slightly simpler and much cooler.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 03:14:12 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1881
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #78 on: January 27, 2013, 03:22:44 pm »
+1

Another option would be "Put this on top of your deck, then put the bottom 3 cards of your deck on top of your deck."

Alternatively, the +3 cards could come from the bottom of your deck.

Not that your solution doesn't work; just more options.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #79 on: January 27, 2013, 07:07:39 pm »
+1

What happens if I gain a Nomad Camp using Exchange?  Where does it go?  Exchange says that the gained card goes to my hand, while Nomad Camp says that it goes to the top of my deck. 

You could phrase it as gaining the cards first, and then moving them to your hand.  But if you trash two Estates into Nomad Camps, then one of them will be covered up, so Exchange will lose track of it.  In fact, even without Nomad Camp, this "fix" would cause one of the two cards to be covered up in the discard pile, so I suppose it's no good.

Edit:  As a related issue, if you gain an Inn directly to your hand, does that mean you cannot shuffle it into your deck?  It's a little ambiguous in Inn's text, since it says to look through your discard pile for actions "(including this)", since ordinarily when you gain the Inn it will be in your discard pile.  It seems like if Exchange gains directly to your hand, then when you gain an Inn you'd be able to shuffle in your other actions, but not this new Inn, since it's an action in your hand, and not in fact an action in your discard pile.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2013, 07:15:19 pm by SirPeebles »
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #80 on: January 28, 2013, 12:02:55 am »
+1

These are good questions.

What happens if I gain a Nomad Camp using Exchange?  Where does it go?  Exchange says that the gained card goes to my hand, while Nomad Camp says that it goes to the top of my deck. 

It's not exactly an official ruling, but you can find what Donald has to say about this here. Until and unless an actual ruling is made, I'd go with his semi-ruling and say that you get to choose whether it goes to your hand or the top of your deck.

Edit:  As a related issue, if you gain an Inn directly to your hand, does that mean you cannot shuffle it into your deck?  It's a little ambiguous in Inn's text, since it says to look through your discard pile for actions "(including this)", since ordinarily when you gain the Inn it will be in your discard pile.  It seems like if Exchange gains directly to your hand, then when you gain an Inn you'd be able to shuffle in your other actions, but not this new Inn, since it's an action in your hand, and not in fact an action in your discard pile.

This question has a more concrete answer than the previous one. Even though Inn says "(including this)", that only applies if it's in your discard pile. There are other reasons it might not be. You might have played a Highway and gained an Inn with Armory, for instance.
« Last Edit: January 28, 2013, 12:36:42 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

Minotaur

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2110
  • Respect: +3342
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #81 on: January 30, 2013, 05:48:53 pm »
+1

This is a nice little fan expansion. It strikes just the right amount of boldness and feels like it fits in with the effects and wording of other cards. Nothing truly mind-bending, but it feels right at home and convincingly sustains a theme. The art picks fit well too. Maybe if it were a real set, a couple more persistent cards could be added that relate to a theme of "enterprise" in some other way. No point in rushing to add more unless they fit, though.
Logged
Storyteller/Crown is Donald's Vietnam Watergate.  Alchemy is Donald's Vietnam.  Scout is the time Donald choked on a pretzel.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #82 on: February 06, 2013, 04:20:14 pm »
+2

I've gotten feedback from several people that using Barracks to gain Conscripts seems too weak. People are very perceptive! It was weak. Even when I bumped Conscripts to be "Choose 2: +$3/gain Gold/give Curses/play Attack card", it was beaten by decks that ignored Attacks. This surprised me; that version of Conscripts seemed so powerful! It took me a while to get over my mental block and realize just how slow it is. It's slower than any official Curse-giver out there, even Familiar. You opponents have a lot of time to get a good deck going before you start cursing them, and chances are you won't run out the Curse pile before the game ends.

While thinking about options for changing Barracks and Conscripts, it occurred to me that I've unintentionally added a second theme to the entire set. It's the decision between instant and delayed gratification. Part of this is a natural result of having several cards that can be trashed when played. Do you take the bonus now, or save it for later? But even some of the non-one shots have it. Inventor can give you cards and a buy now or save itself for later. The current version of Clerk I'm testing also has the ability to put cards either in hand or back on your deck.

But nowhere is this theme more pronounced than in Barracks. One option lets you draw an Attack card in place of your Barracks and play it this turn. It often also provides a bunch of cycling, letting you get to your new purchases sooner. The other option does nothing for you this turn. It doesn't even replace the Barracks in your hand. You won't see the Conscripts for another shuffle. It's slow. Anyhow, I've pumped up the cards while embracing this now/later dichotomy.

Barracks
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+1 Action. Choose one: gain 2 Conscripts from the Conscripts pile; or reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an Attack card, put that Attack card into your hand, and discard the other revealed cards.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
Return this to the Conscripts pile. Gain a Gold. Each other player gains a Curse. You may play an Attack card from your hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

The first big difference is that you get two Conscripts cards instead of one when you pick the first option on Barracks. The second is that instead of giving you a choice from 2 of 4 effects with Conscripts, you always get the last three. I took off the +$3 option, which (unintentially) amplified the dealyed gratification effect. You won't see the Gold you gain until next shuffle; likewise with your opponent's Curse.

I've tested this version in several mock games, and it seems to strike a good balance. Importantly, it seems to encourage you to use both of Barracks' abilities in most games. Using it just for gaining Conscripts is too slow for many games. Choosing the cycling option gets those Golds into your deck faster.

Barracks effectively takes up two Kingdom card slots in the "box", so it's got to be a star of the set. Hopefully this version works out. Any opinions on the cards just from looking at them? This community has good instincts, and as always I appreciate any feedback.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2013, 05:45:08 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #83 on: February 06, 2013, 08:40:58 pm »
+1

Barracks effectively takes up two Kingdom card slots in the "box", so it's got to be a star of the set. Hopefully this version works out. Any opinions on the cards just from looking at them? This community has good instincts, and as always I appreciate any feedback.

Looks like a good improvement.  Especially removing the choose two from Conscripts.  However, now that Barracks allows you to pick up two Conscripts, have you considered how many Conscripts the game should have?

I'd suggest more than 10.  Maybe not 20, since they to return to the Conscripts pile with every use.  15 might be good.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #84 on: February 06, 2013, 09:47:55 pm »
+1

Barracks effectively takes up two Kingdom card slots in the "box", so it's got to be a star of the set. Hopefully this version works out. Any opinions on the cards just from looking at them? This community has good instincts, and as always I appreciate any feedback.

Looks like a good improvement.  Especially removing the choose two from Conscripts.  However, now that Barracks allows you to pick up two Conscripts, have you considered how many Conscripts the game should have?

I'd suggest more than 10.  Maybe not 20, since they to return to the Conscripts pile with every use.  15 might be good.

I'm designing this like a real 150 card set, so it will be either 15 or 16, depending on whether I end up using a card to mark the banned pile for my current version of Boycott. During playtesting, I've been using 16 copies.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2013, 09:48:58 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #85 on: February 07, 2013, 02:50:17 am »
+1

You could use the boycott randomiser as the boycott pile.

Also as posted in another thread, have you considered putting +2 actions on Enforcer or Exchange? With Enforcer, there'd be an interesting thing with it being a highly unstable engine piece,  as well as being the first +2 actions attack.

Exchange having +2 actions means that you can gain 2 terminal actions and play them both that turn. Very justifiably a $5 oneshot. It also definitely looks like a +2 actions kind of place in the artwork.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2013, 02:55:35 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #86 on: February 07, 2013, 03:04:05 am »
+1

Tax collector seems like a much better Pillage (not a oneshot, trashes instead of discards, +$2) because it will usually be a very helpful card that's being trashed. Early game it will be their best card, while late game there'll have to be important greening related tradeoffs.

Perhaps make the cheaper card go on top of the deck to give the affected opponent some strategic opportunities. Thematically it would be like giving THEM a oneshot.
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #87 on: February 07, 2013, 08:40:39 am »
+2

as well as being the first +2 actions attack.

Dame Molly?
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

Drab Emordnilap

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1832
  • Shuffle iT Username: Drab Emordnilap
  • Luther Bell Hendricks V
  • Respect: +1881
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #88 on: February 07, 2013, 11:07:23 am »
+1

Barracks effectively takes up two Kingdom card slots in the "box", so it's got to be a star of the set. Hopefully this version works out. Any opinions on the cards just from looking at them? This community has good instincts, and as always I appreciate any feedback.

Looks like a good improvement.  Especially removing the choose two from Conscripts.  However, now that Barracks allows you to pick up two Conscripts, have you considered how many Conscripts the game should have?

I'd suggest more than 10.  Maybe not 20, since they to return to the Conscripts pile with every use.  15 might be good.

I'm designing this like a real 150 card set, so it will be either 15 or 16, depending on whether I end up using a card to mark the banned pile for my current version of Boycott. During playtesting, I've been using 16 copies.

15 has the advantage of matching Spoils, also.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #89 on: February 07, 2013, 11:53:19 am »
+1

You could use the boycott randomiser as the boycott pile.

Yes, I may end up doing that, but it might be nice if it looked noticeably different than the normal Boycott cards, to prevent confusion.

Also as posted in another thread, have you considered putting +2 actions on Enforcer or Exchange? With Enforcer, there'd be an interesting thing with it being a highly unstable engine piece,  as well as being the first +2 actions attack.

Exchange having +2 actions means that you can gain 2 terminal actions and play them both that turn. Very justifiably a $5 oneshot. It also definitely looks like a +2 actions kind of place in the artwork.

Well, the reason I haven't done this already is that I think people generally want stable villages. Furthermore, that might very well push Enforcer up out of $4 territory. I could get rid of the attack portion of it, but then it'd be too similar to Gambler in my mind.

I'm strongly leaning toward adding it to Exchange, though, for the reasons you mention. I'll certainly test that out immediately. There are enough one-shots in the set that perhaps having a one-shot village isn't such an issue.

Tax collector seems like a much better Pillage (not a oneshot, trashes instead of discards, +$2) because it will usually be a very helpful card that's being trashed. Early game it will be their best card, while late game there'll have to be important greening related tradeoffs.

Well, Pillage does gain you two Spoils and Tax Collector costs $6, but your point is well taken.

Perhaps make the cheaper card go on top of the deck to give the affected opponent some strategic opportunities. Thematically it would be like giving THEM a oneshot.

Now we're cooking with gas. Regardless of whether Tax Collector needs a nerf, I like this change because it incentivizes gaining Treasures and Actions rather than Victory cards (unless you think you won't get to draw them). The original version of Tax Collector didn't allow you to gain replacement Victory cards at all. I think this is a very nice compromise. I'll test it out.

Thanks for the ideas!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #90 on: February 07, 2013, 02:54:39 pm »
+1

15 has the advantage of matching Spoils, also.

Well, like Conscripts, Prizes, and even Potions, I'm sure the exact number of Spoils included in Dark Ages was a function of how many cards were needed to fill out the box. Obviously the ballpark number for these cards is a function of necessity. It would be crazy to have 16 Prizes or only 5 Potions. But the exact number isn't crucial. For instance, Alchemy could have had another Victory card and I'm sure 14 Potions would have sufficed.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #91 on: February 07, 2013, 07:34:00 pm »
+1

My other suggestions are:
*Clerk seems a bit too similar to Scavenger, but I guess the fact that you don't do a Chancellor effect makes it more similar to Bureaucrat and still interesting. Might be a bit weak for $4; I'd suggest making the gain more flexible but then it's stepping on Armory's turf. The reaction is the card's real power though; it may even be stalemate inducing. I pity the man who decides to build a Scrying Pool deck, only to seriously enable you to build your own much faster. Have you considered "trash this and any number of cards from your hand", or making it a discard reaction?

*Perhaps you could make Conscripts more like Spoils and give multiple cards the power to gain them? It doesn't seem like there's much room though. A card with room for "when you trash this, gain a Conscripts" is Inventor, and it could work thematically (the inventor was out of the job, so he got drafted into the army).  Gambler may also have room for something (in terms of words on the card), and that card could do with something to make it more meaningful than a harmless early game trasher. It would need a "Hermit"/"Urchin" sort of clause though, and the card's beauty is in its simplicity. Mind you, a degenerate Gambler will probably find himself needing to join the Conscripts when his luck's really far down.

*For tracking reasons (as well as to give it a bit of a boost for the "miss the reshuffle" power), perhaps set the Floodgate aside as well when you gain it?
« Last Edit: February 07, 2013, 07:56:49 pm by NoMoreFun »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #92 on: February 07, 2013, 07:55:25 pm »
+1

*Clerk seems a bit too similar to Scavenger, but I guess the fact that you don't do a Chancellor effect makes it more similar to Bureaucrat and still interesting. Might be a bit weak for $4; I'd suggest making the gain more flexible but then it's stepping on Armory's turf. The reaction is the card's real power though; it may even be stalemate inducing. I pity the man who decides to build a Scrying Pool deck, only to seriously enable you to build your own much faster. Have you considered "trash this and any number of cards from your hand", or making it a discard reaction?

Yes, Clerk was one of the casualties of Dark Ages. It was such a unique card before Scavenger was released. :)
I'm currently testing another version of Clerk.

Clerk
Types: Action – Reaction
Cost: 4
Look at the top 2 cards of your deck and draw any number of them; +$1 for each one you put back.

When another player plays an Attack card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, trash any number of cards from your hand.

The reaction hasn't been a problem so far, although I grant you that I haven't played with it and Scrying Pool yet. For most Attacks, you just don't want to buy them on turns 1 and 2. After that, the chance that the player with Clerk having more than two card in hand that he wants to trash is slim. I have considered making it a discard-based Reaction. While I'm not dismissing the idea outright, it would make the card so, so much weaker.

*Perhaps you could make Conscripts more like Spoils and give multiple cards the power to gain them? It doesn't seem like there's much room though. A card with room for "when you trash this, gain a Conscripts" is Inventor, and it could work thematically (the inventor was out of the job, so he got drafted into the army).  Gambler may also have room for something (in terms of words on the card), and that card could do with something to make it more meaningful than a harmless early game trasher. It would need a "Hermit"/"Urchin" sort of clause though, and the card's beauty is in its simplicity.

Nice thought. It had occurred to me as well, but I don't know where I'd stick that.

*For tracking reasons (as well as to give it a bit of a boost for the "miss the reshuffle" power), perhaps set the Floodgate aside as well when you gain it?

I'd considered this as well. That could be quite a power boost, I think. If Floodgate is too weak, it's definitely the first thing I'll try (but I'll probably also limit the number of other set-aside cards to 4 if I make that change).
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #93 on: February 07, 2013, 08:03:37 pm »
+1

Also the OP has the old version of Conscripts, and is inconsistent about whether inventor has +buy.

I think giving Inventor a when trash Conscripts just helps shoehorn it into the original (one-shot) theme much better, and when trash effects on powerful cards seem mostly arbitrary anyway.

One last thought: Gambler's got the same issue as Wishing Well in that most of the top deck related combos (eg Spy) don't work to ensure safe trashing. Perhaps you could reverse the effects (gamble first, then draw)? I always found that aspect of Wishing Well frustrating. EDIT: Mind you, Gambler would be the only non terminal trasher in Dominion that doesn't decrease your hand size, and one of very few trashers in general (along with Masquerade and potentially JOAT) that doesn't decrease your hand size. Perhaps it's too strong if you can combo it with every top deck related card, but those cards aren't particularly strong in most cases, and you're also forgoing the useful effect of cards like Spy (discarding the junk for sifting) for this potential combo.
« Last Edit: February 07, 2013, 08:24:08 pm by NoMoreFun »
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #94 on: February 07, 2013, 08:51:41 pm »
+1

EDIT: Mind you, Gambler would be the only non terminal trasher in Dominion that doesn't decrease your hand size

There's Spice Merchant, but it only trashes Treasures.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #95 on: February 07, 2013, 09:16:23 pm »
+1

Also the OP has the old version of Conscripts, and is inconsistent about whether inventor has +buy.

Ah, thanks for catching the Inventor inconsistency. I've updated the OP to include the +1 Buy. I'm just about to update the card image for Conscripts now, which is why you see the old one in the OP. For my mock games, I was using the old version as a proxy.

I think giving Inventor a when trash Conscripts just helps shoehorn it into the original (one-shot) theme much better, and when trash effects on powerful cards seem mostly arbitrary anyway.

I appreciate the idea, but it seems a bit forced for my liking. I'm OK with having Inventor not tie directly into the one-shot theme. I definitely want to have a few off-theme cards.

One last thought: Gambler's got the same issue as Wishing Well in that most of the top deck related combos (eg Spy) don't work to ensure safe trashing. Perhaps you could reverse the effects (gamble first, then draw)? I always found that aspect of Wishing Well frustrating. EDIT: Mind you, Gambler would be the only non terminal trasher in Dominion that doesn't decrease your hand size, and one of very few trashers in general (along with Masquerade and potentially JOAT) that doesn't decrease your hand size. Perhaps it's too strong if you can combo it with every top deck related card, but those cards aren't particularly strong in most cases, and you're also forgoing the useful effect of cards like Spy (discarding the junk for sifting) for this potential combo.

Well, Gambler's whole card concept is pretty much the blind trashing. It was definitely balanced around the fact that it's very hard to know what that card's going to be (no handsize reduction, etc.). I think that reversing the effects would probably make it too strong.

On a side note, I've started picking up Gamblers in the mid to late game, and it doesn't seem to be too bad, which surprised me. I guess it makes sense, though. There are lots of situations in which your deck has enough Silver, for instance.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #96 on: February 08, 2013, 12:29:47 pm »
+2

I've updated the first post with new images and descriptions for Clerk, Barracks, and Conscripts.

I've also printed out new cards for Tax Collector (with putting the gained card on deck), Floodgate (with setting aside the Floodgate), Boycott (with one Boycott pile instead of three), and Exchange (with +2 Actions), but won't update the OP until I've tested out those changes. I'll be without internet access from the 10th to the 17th, but I hope to get some playtesting done over that period. NoMoreFun, thanks again for the various suggestions!
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 01:51:22 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #97 on: February 08, 2013, 04:13:58 pm »
+1

I've also printed out new cards for Tax Collector (with putting the gained card on deck), Floodgate (with setting aside the Floodgate), Boycott (with one Boycott pile instead of three), and Exchange (with +2 Actions), but won't update the OP until I've tested out those changes. I'll be without internet access from the 10th to the 17th, but I hope to get some playtesting done over that period. NoMoreFun, thanks again for the various suggestions!

Awesome.  This is by far my favorite fan-made expansion.

What was the change to Boycott?  I don't recall seeing a post about it.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 04:45:21 pm by TWoos »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #98 on: February 08, 2013, 04:42:22 pm »
+1

I've also printed out new cards for Tax Collector (with putting the gained card on deck), Floodgate (with setting aside the Floodgate), Boycott (with one Boycott pile instead of three), and Exchange (with +2 Actions), but won't update the OP until I've tested out those changes. I'll be without internet access from the 10th to the 17th, but I hope to get some playtesting done over that period. NoMoreFun, thanks again for the various suggestions!
Awesome.  This is by far my favorite fan-made expansion.

Thanks! I really appreciate the encouragement.

Quote
What was the change to Boycott?  I don't recall seeing a post about it.

I've found that having a three-pile sideboard makes Boycott very cumbersome to set up and not very accessible. I think players avoid the card because they don't want to think about all the options. Also, swapping piles between the Supply and the sideboard often meant that the piles were out of cost order, which many players (including me) like to keep them in. I found myself avoiding games with Boycott just because of all the extra hassle. So, I'm going to try a version of Boycott that adds one additional pile in the Supply (like Young Witch) and uses a marker to indicate the pile that's not currently in the Supply. The marker will either be the Boycott randomizer or a unique marker card, although I plan to use a Settlers robber piece for my testing.

Boycott's probably the most unique card in the set in terms of new game mechanics, and I'd like to keep it if possible. I hope I can get to a version that I feel really works and is different enough from Embargo to be worthwhile. Just in case it doesn't work out, I've been developing a possible replacement card. Hopefully it won't come to that.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2013, 04:44:15 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9146
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #99 on: February 08, 2013, 04:43:54 pm »
+1

You could add 2 or 3 piles and just include enough markers to cover the extras.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #100 on: February 08, 2013, 04:46:07 pm »
+1

You could add 2 or 3 piles and just include enough markers to cover the extras.

That thought had occurred to me. As long as it doesn't cut into the Conscripts pile too much, it's a possibility. I'm going to try the one-pile version first, just in the interest of simplicity. If it doesn't work out, I'll try 2 and 3-pile versions again. As I said, though, it's a fair amount of extra setup.
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #101 on: February 08, 2013, 04:48:39 pm »
+1

You could add 2 or 3 piles and just include enough markers to cover the extras.

I like that idea.  Or, and this is just off the top of my head, you could add one extra pile per player, picked by each player, and initially mark those piles as not yet in the kingdom.

It would be a sort of anti-veto.
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1169
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #102 on: February 08, 2013, 11:32:51 pm »
+1

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
Return this to the Conscripts pile. Gain a Gold. Each other player gains a Curse. You may play an Attack card from your hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

Holy cow, can I get a King's court with that please! 3 Golds, opponents get 3 curses, and I can play 3 attack cards from my hand! AWESOMEST CARD EVER!

You need wording like madman: Return this to the Conscripts pile. If you do... Maybe add a vanila bonus of +1 something just to make up for not being able to KC/TR/Prosesion it.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #103 on: February 09, 2013, 12:22:07 am »
+1

... I don't get the impression that it's that good with KC. Most other cursers give out 3 Curses and the Attack card playing part rarely comes into play (and it's not like in most engines you can't play multiple Attacks per turn). Gaining 3 Golds is pretty cool, though.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #104 on: February 09, 2013, 12:50:34 am »
+1

I don't think playing Conscripts multiple times has the exponential effect of playing a Madman multiple times, so it's probably not as vital.

The closest existing card to Conscripts is Marauder. It gives a curse instead of a ruins, and instead of being a permanent card that gives a temporary gold it's a temporary card that gives a permanent gold. The non terminal thing is a nice bonus but probably won't come up that often. It will be very nice with cards like Spy and Enforcer so it can be truly non terminal but it will largely be a rare thing. It does mean conscripts will never clash though.

I'd like to see barracks playtested with the conscripts gain used every single time. "+1 action, gain 2 Golds" is obviously too strong for $5, and I'm not convinced that delaying it reshuffle is bad enough to make it balanced, especially considering there's a curse being given. If the bonus is just +$3 then at least there may be a reason not to play your Conscripts immediately. Maybe tether the action to the draw (or even make it +2 actions again with this link)

Also I've brought it up a lot, but if Inventor had a different name, the when trash Conscripts wouldn't seem forced at all. It wouldn't seem any more forced than Catacombs, Cultist or Hunting Grounds anyway. Having an entire kingdom sized pile for one card does stick out a lot in a small box. Dark ages could get away with having 20 Rats, but that's because it gets compared to all the other large expansions and comes out on top. Tournament prizes are 5 unique cards, and Potion's necessary for 10 cards in Alchemy. When trash conscripts on "Inventor" would just add a little bit. Also if there are balance issues, a when gain conscripts bonus could work.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #105 on: February 18, 2013, 03:48:43 pm »
+2

I've just returned from JoCo Cruise Crazy 3. Once again, I won the on-board Dominion tournament, although there was definitely stiffer competition this year. The final games against mconst were both fun and intense. More importantly, the wonderful Dominion players on-board were happy to playtest these cards! (Not in tournament games, obviously.) I'd like to give a big thank-you to them.

Gambler was quite popular. I had considered it the dud of the set, so I was happy that the card was well-liked. Once again, I'm seeing that it's not just a card that you buy on the first two turns. This should have been obvious, in retrospect. In the endgame, a lot of decks would rather have a one-shot Lab than a Silver they're only going to see one time anyway.

I played one Mill Town game where my opponent went for a Mill Town/Council Room/Laboratory deck, attempting to gain Provinces from the Mill Towns. He was successful! I was ahead on Provinces for most of the game, but he ended the game with a megaturn that put him ahead by a few points. It's nice to see that the Mill Town-heavy strategy can work on certain boards.

I only played one game with Boycott (vs. my wife), and it didn't do much beyond the first couple of turns. mconst said that he would probably only use it for the coins and mostly ignore the marker, and I have to say I think he's right. To fix this, he suggested I replace the +$3 bit with something else, like a gain. It's good advice, but at this point I'm leaning toward replacing the card altogether. I know it has its fans, but I feel like it's got too much going against it (too similar to Embargo, not useful often enough, etc.).

The new version of Clerk seems OK so far. I think we only played one game with it, but it wasn't terribly broken there.

I've updated the OP with the new version of Floodgate, which got plenty of testing. I really like this version (which sets itself aside when gained, along with up to 4 other cards). Not only is it nicer for when you're trying to make some dead cards skip a reshuffle, but it's great when you've got a trash-for-benefit card in your hand with no target. Simply buy a Floodgate and save it and the trash-for-benefit card for your next turn, when you can trash the Floodgate. I'm not entirely sure that strategy's always a good one, but it's fun and seems very useful thus far. It works especially well with Exchange.

The new versions of Barracks and Conscripts didn't get as much testing as I would have liked. I played one game with it where I went for it and my opponent didn't in order to help test it. That was nice of him, but there was no good way to deal with Curses, and I crushed him. I don't think that's necessarily indicative of Barracks/Conscripts being too powerful, as I would expect that result with any Curse-giving card. Still, I'd like to test them more.

The version of Exchange with +2 Actions seemed fine. You won't always be using both actions, but I don't see a problem with that. There were concerns that it would be too powerful with King's Court, so we played a 4-player Enterprise/Prosperity game and tried it out. As it turns out, it's not easy to set up a turn where you King's Court and play Exchange, so it never actually happened. It was definitely a fun game, though.

Fund seems like a very solid $5 card and I don't think it's going to change from its current state. It's not a power $5, but there are a lot of reasons to go for it (you've got $5 and your deck needs a money boost; you need an extra buy for the engine you've been building; etc.). I'm very happy with the card as it stands. It got quite a bit of play, both by me and others.

Inventor was in the Enterprise/Prosperity game I mentioned, and although Exchange never got King's Courted, Inventor did. Frequently. It's definitely an interesting King's Court target, and it's part of what made that game so fun. I will need to test it more in games without King's Court, though!

Finally, I only got to play one good game with Tax Collector and Surveyor, and unfortunately, neither really got the chance to shine. It was a game with both Goons and Bishop, so often only one of the 3 other players would actually be hit by the attack. It does seem to cause a lot of AP, unfortunately. I'm not sure if it's too much yet, and I'm also not sure if it'll be lessened once people get more familiar with the card. I suppose time will tell. Regardless, the version where you put the gained card on your deck needs more testing, so I haven't updated the OP with the new version quite yet. Surveyor may not work out, but I'm not ready to give up on it yet.

I can't remember if we playtested Enforcer, but that card's had quite a bit of testing previously. I'm not real worried about it.

Once again, thanks to all the people who helped me playtest the cards! I really appreciate it.
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 05:35:09 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

TWoos

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 149
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #106 on: February 18, 2013, 08:15:37 pm »
+1

I'll be sorry to see Boycott go, but I can see why it's tough to make work.

Any ideas what will replace it?
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #107 on: February 18, 2013, 10:27:56 pm »
+1

How bout exploring other vanilla for boycott:
+$2, +2 Actions
Now a weak Festival/ Actiony Silver.

Edit: Actually how about something like "Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. If any are Actions or Treasures, play one of them. Discard the rest."
« Last Edit: February 18, 2013, 10:30:33 pm by One Armed Man »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #108 on: February 19, 2013, 01:29:38 am »
+1

I'd like to see barracks playtested with the conscripts gain used every single time. "+1 action, gain 2 Golds" is obviously too strong for $5, and I'm not convinced that delaying it reshuffle is bad enough to make it balanced, especially considering there's a curse being given. If the bonus is just +$3 then at least there may be a reason not to play your Conscripts immediately. Maybe tether the action to the draw (or even make it +2 actions again with this link)

Concerning always using Barracks for gaining Conscripts, exactly how it shakes out will vary from Kingdom to Kingdom, but testing has shown it's almost always a bad idea. I tested the current version of Conscripts before posting it, but I don't remember the specifics. However, I did play a few mock games just now. The deck that inflexibly used Barracks only for the Conscripts gain always lost. A deck with two Barracks lost against BM-double Witch, and that's with the two Witches colliding AND missing the reshuffle TWICE.

Here's a pertinent quote from Donald (emphasis mine):

Market Square: Once Intrigue had the top half. By the time I was working on Intrigue for publication, it didn't seem worth a slot. I brought it back here because I needed a simple top for the reaction. Before that I tried the reaction paired with Fool's Gold's top.

Originally the reaction was, you could trash this to gain a Gold when one of your cards was trashed. Time has shown that gaining a Gold is not as awesome as it looks (btw spoilers), and I eventually got around to testing the stronger version that made it into the set.

The comparison between Barracks/Conscripts and Market Square is very apt. It's not just a matter of the Golds being delayed a shuffle. It's the fact that neither the Conscripts nor the Barracks (when played for the gain) help your current turn, effectively leaving you with a smaller hand size. Furthermore, Conscripts don't provide true +Action, so they can collide with other terminal Actions. Once you play with Market Square a while, you realize that eventually you have to stop gaining Gold and keep the Market Square in your hand in order to maintain your handsize. A similar thing happens in most Barracks games, and if you're the only one giving Curses, it may happen well before the Curse pile runs out.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 01:58:37 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #109 on: February 19, 2013, 11:11:07 am »
+1

You could add 2 or 3 piles and just include enough markers to cover the extras.

I like that idea.  Or, and this is just off the top of my head, you could add one extra pile per player, picked by each player, and initially mark those piles as not yet in the kingdom.

It would be a sort of anti-veto.

This is a neat idea, but I think in practice it would draw out the pre-game process even longer, which is not what I want.

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
Return this to the Conscripts pile. Gain a Gold. Each other player gains a Curse. You may play an Attack card from your hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

Holy cow, can I get a King's court with that please! 3 Golds, opponents get 3 curses, and I can play 3 attack cards from my hand! AWESOMEST CARD EVER!

You need wording like madman: Return this to the Conscripts pile. If you do... Maybe add a vanila bonus of +1 something just to make up for not being able to KC/TR/Prosesion it.

NoMoreFun and dondon151 have already said everything I would have. King's Court on a Conscripts is good, but not game-breaking. It doesn't feed on itself like King's Court/Madman would if Madman didn't have the "if you do" clause.

The closest existing card to Conscripts is Marauder. It gives a curse instead of a ruins, and instead of being a permanent card that gives a temporary gold it's a temporary card that gives a permanent gold. The non terminal thing is a nice bonus but probably won't come up that often.

Actually, thanks to Barracks's ability to dig for an Attack card, it comes up quite frequently. If a Conscripts and a Barracks collide, you can often chain Attack cards. You wouldn't think this would usually be a good strategy, but the extra cycling you get combined with the fact that it doesn't decrease your handsize (like gaining Conscripts would) means that it's very often worthwhile.

Really, I'm quite pleased with how Barracks and Conscripts work right now. It seems like you'll be getting use out of both of Barracks's effects in most games, which is exactly what I want.

Also I've brought it up a lot, but if Inventor had a different name, the when trash Conscripts wouldn't seem forced at all. It wouldn't seem any more forced than Catacombs, Cultist or Hunting Grounds anyway. Having an entire kingdom sized pile for one card does stick out a lot in a small box. Dark ages could get away with having 20 Rats, but that's because it gets compared to all the other large expansions and comes out on top. Tournament prizes are 5 unique cards, and Potion's necessary for 10 cards in Alchemy. When trash conscripts on "Inventor" would just add a little bit. Also if there are balance issues, a when gain conscripts bonus could work.

Another issue I have with having several cards gain Conscripts is that it means there are effectively several Curse-giving cards in the set. I guess Cornucopia got away with that, but it's not something I'm excited to do.

If I really had to make more use of Conscripts, I'd rather replace Boycott with a new card that makes use of them than muck with Inventor at this point. There's also the possibility of having several types of one-shot "Solidier" cards that do different attacks. Perhaps Barracks could gain any of them, but other cards could only gain certain ones, or something like that. If I did any of these things, I'd probably scrap Tax Collector. Otherwise the set feels way too Attack-heavy. I suppose I could put Tax Collector's attack on one of the one-shots, though. Hmm....

I'll be sorry to see Boycott go, but I can see why it's tough to make work.

Any ideas what will replace it?

I had an idea for a one-shot card called Jubilee that caused everyone to gain a card. It would be something like, "Each player sets aside a differently-named Kingdom card from the Supply. Each player gains a set-aside card." It would probably have a vanilla bonus as well. The thing is, I worry it's too political. Also, it would probably speed the game up quite a bit. Also, it'd probably end up being a cheap card, and I'd really like Boycott's replacement to cost $5 if possible.

Really what I want is a $5 card, probably not a one-shot, that ties into the short-term/long-term theme and has a non-Attack player interaction.

How bout exploring other vanilla for boycott:
+$2, +2 Actions
Now a weak Festival/ Actiony Silver.

Edit: Actually how about something like "Look at the top 3 cards of your deck. If any are Actions or Treasures, play one of them. Discard the rest."

Maybe. I won't completely scrap Boycott until I have a good replacement, so I might try out other bonuses first. Thanks for the suggestions!

EDIT: I do have one other option available to make the fact that Barracks/Conscripts takes up 27 cards a little more palatable: add 13 more Kingdom cards to the set and make it a 300-card box with 25 Kingdom cards in it. That seems like a monumental task, but I'm starting to consider it more seriously. I really wish I knew what was in Guilds so that I could make sure there's no overlap before starting work on a bunch of new cards.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 05:27:06 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #110 on: February 19, 2013, 11:40:35 pm »
+1

Searching through my old card ideas, I found this and tested it on my own a bit. It could be a replacement for Boycott or it could be the first of several new cards. I have yet to decide. If it does replace Boycott, the set will have a dearth of terminal Action cards, so I'm torn.



Convocation
Types: Action
Cost: 5
+1 Action. Reveal the top 3 cards of your deck. Discard revealed cards until no two of them share a type. Put the rest into your hand.

EDIT: I also just updated Tax Collector in the top post, adding the 'gain to the top of the deck' clause.
« Last Edit: February 19, 2013, 11:48:33 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #111 on: February 20, 2013, 12:02:36 am »
+2

With Convocation, if you reveal an Action, a Treasure and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think not.
If you reveal 2 Coppers and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think so.

It just seems like an interesting quirk.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #112 on: February 20, 2013, 12:15:25 am »
+1

With Convocation, if you reveal an Action, a Treasure and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think not.
If you reveal 2 Coppers and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think so.

It just seems like an interesting quirk.

Huh, I guess you're right. That is an interesting quirk.
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #113 on: February 20, 2013, 02:32:51 pm »
+2

So I have a couple of ideas for Boycott that may or may not have already been suggested.

First, you can make it a bit like Young Witch and just add an 11th kingdom card instead of making a sideboard. Start out the game with having a Boycott token on that supply pile. A pile with a Boycott token cannot be bought from (but hypothetically you can still circumvent this with gaining; not sure if this is a good enough tradeoff). An alternative is to say that a pile with a Boycott token is not in the supply, which will prevent any buying or gaining. The token method is functionally the same but it looks less complicated. If you decide to keep the sideboard, you can also reduce the number of cards on the sideboard from 3 to 2.

EDIT: seems like you already considered this. I was just going off the cards on the first page. Sorry for the confusion.

Second, you can also take another example from Young Witch and necessitate that the extra kingdom cards cost $5. This will make the sideboard cards much more appealing on average.

I'm not entirely sure that Boycott is an effective card if it is a self-trasher. The problem here is that playing with Boycott is not adaptable because once a pile has been switched out, you need to regain Boycott and play it as a terminal action in order to switch the pile back in. You also have to consider that there will invariably be useless supply piles in the kingdom and those may just be switched out permanently after a single play of Boycott, after which Boycott will just end up being a self-trashing terminal Gold.

Self-trashing was okay with Embargo because it's 1) cheap and 2) you can't "reverse" an Embargo by playing something else. One solution that I can propose is to make Boycott a self-trashing terminal Silver instead (at the same cost) and to gain it to the top of your deck. This adds a little more functional nuance to the card. Unfortunately it does introduce a huge disparity in 4/3 openings because one guy can get 4/5 with trashing Boycott and the other guy can only get 4/4. This is worse than with Nomad Camp because at least Nomad Camp stays in your deck. You can also consider adding an "if you do move the Boycott token, trash this," which would resolve the 4/3 opening problem.



EDIT 2: I also glossed over the concern for Clerk's power in countering Scrying Pool decks. An alternative suggestion is to set aside Clerk and trash exactly 1 card from your hand upon getting attacked instead of trashing any number of cards. This still turns discard attacks into a net benefit and also soft counter Curse-givers but not to an extreme extent. I just think that being able to trash your entire hand in response to an attack is really swingy. Compare to Trader, where revealing it in response to a Curse-giver is not so amazing.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2013, 02:55:38 pm by dondon151 »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #114 on: February 20, 2013, 03:18:27 pm »
+1

dondon, thanks very much for the ideas! I have to say that I think removing the self-trashing portion of Boycott makes a lot of sense. I think I've got enough one-shots in the set without it at this point. I also really like the idea of making the pile that the token starts on a $5 card. I might test it with and without that part. I wonder if moving the Boycott token should be optional for the version that doesn't trash itself.

So how does this version look?

Boycott
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+$2. You may move the Boycott marker to a nonempty Kingdom card pile in the Supply.

Setup: Add an extra Kingdom card pile costing 5 Coins to the Supply and put the Boycott marker on it. A pile with the Boycott marker is not part of the Supply.

At this point, I definitely don't want the gained Boycott to go on your deck, since I want all players to be able to buy a copy of Boycott before it gets removed from the Supply. Not that you were necessarily advocating that in combination with the removal of the self-trashing clause. I just thought I'd address it.

EDIT 2: I also glossed over the concern for Clerk's power in countering Scrying Pool decks. An alternative suggestion is to set aside Clerk and trash exactly 1 card from your hand upon getting attacked instead of trashing any number of cards. This still turns discard attacks into a net benefit and also soft counter Curse-givers but not to an extreme extent. I just think that being able to trash your entire hand in response to an attack is really swingy. Compare to Trader, where revealing it in response to a Curse-giver is not so amazing.

Hmm, I understand your concern. There are two reasons I haven't changed Clerk's reaction to [set aside/trash one] as you suggest. First, it would have to be a lot more wordy and I'm worried about space on the physical card. Second, I haven't actually had balance issues with Clerk's current reaction. As I've said, it discourages buying Attacks on turns 1 and 2. After that, the chance that you're trashing more than 1 or 2 cards from your hand is pretty slim. I mean sure, you might get lucky and be able to trash 4 Curses, but you might also be able to buy 8 Provinces by turn 13 using Chancellor. The odds just aren't in your favor.

As far as countering Scrying Pool decks specifically, I'm not really concerned about interactions with a single card (see Mill Town/Tactician) unless they create rules ambiguities, are able to shut a player out of the game, or are absurdly powerful combos that you can build without relying on your opponents. If Clerk's presence means players don't buy Scrying Pool, so be it. There are plenty of games where Scrying Pool is dominant. If Clerk turns out to be too powerful against all, most, or even a large proportion of Attacks, I'll definitely change it. I'm definitely open to the possibility that it's too powerful and I just haven't playtested it enough yet. It certainly does look powerful, I'll grant you.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2013, 03:22:02 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #115 on: February 20, 2013, 04:18:58 pm »
+1

So how does this version look?

It looks fine. Definitely playtest it to make sure that it isn't a little weak or too strong, though. I don't know how strong the supply blocking is if only one person gets the card.

First, it would have to be a lot more wordy and I'm worried about space on the physical card.

"Set this aside" and "a card" versus "reveal this" and "any number of cards" seems like a wash to me. It does take a little bit of extra text to instruct the player to return the card to hand.

As far as countering Scrying Pool decks specifically, I'm not really concerned about interactions with a single card (see Mill Town/Tactician) unless they create rules ambiguities, are able to shut a player out of the game, or are absurdly powerful combos that you can build without relying on your opponents. If Clerk's presence means players don't buy Scrying Pool, so be it. There are plenty of games where Scrying Pool is dominant.

It doesn't actually counter SP decks in the traditional sense. SP decks benefit from the Clerk trashing as well. In any case, if you do find some combination that is really strong with the current version of Clerk's reaction, the modified version should mitigate it.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #116 on: February 20, 2013, 04:59:51 pm »
+1

"Set this aside" and "a card" versus "reveal this" and "any number of cards" seems like a wash to me. It does take a little bit of extra text to instruct the player to return the card to hand.

Yeah, that's the part that takes the extra text.

It doesn't actually counter SP decks in the traditional sense. SP decks benefit from the Clerk trashing as well. In any case, if you do find some combination that is really strong with the current version of Clerk's reaction, the modified version should mitigate it.

I do miss the old version of Clerk that gained a Silver. It diluted your deck and mitigated how powerful the trashing usually got.
Logged

ConMan

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1342
  • Respect: +1598
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #117 on: February 20, 2013, 05:46:07 pm »
+1

With Convocation, if you reveal an Action, a Treasure and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think not.
If you reveal 2 Coppers and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think so.

It just seems like an interesting quirk.
I kind of like that. Although, if the revealed Action was also a Reaction, then you *could* discard the Tunnel. Actually, I quite like the card in general, because it doesn't quite match any existing card and it looks like one of those cards that's hard to use right, but powerful when you do.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #118 on: February 20, 2013, 05:50:21 pm »
+1

With Convocation, if you reveal an Action, a Treasure and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think not.
If you reveal 2 Coppers and a Tunnel, do you have the option of discarding the Tunnel? I would think so.

It just seems like an interesting quirk.
I kind of like that. Although, if the revealed Action was also a Reaction, then you *could* discard the Tunnel. Actually, I quite like the card in general, because it doesn't quite match any existing card and it looks like one of those cards that's hard to use right, but powerful when you do.

Thanks. I thought it would be too close to Laboratory, but it's different enough to be interesting. If you let your deck get too Treasure-heavy, for instance, it may only draw you one card. It also cuts through Curses like nothing, making it a decent Witch counter. If I actually end up doubling the size of this set, I'll almost certainly add it.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2013, 05:51:48 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4988
  • Respect: +5240
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #119 on: February 21, 2013, 06:49:36 am »
+1

Those are amazing *__*
I didn't think i could like a one-shot theme but these are fantastic. My only concern is that Boycot should not be able to remove itself from the supply... Also, where did you get the Artwork from?

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #120 on: February 21, 2013, 10:51:01 am »
+1

Those are amazing *__*
I didn't think i could like a one-shot theme but these are fantastic. My only concern is that Boycot should not be able to remove itself from the supply... Also, where did you get the Artwork from?

The artwork I got from anywhere I could find it on the internet. It's definitely not all licensed for commercial use, but for the purpose of mocking up fan cards, I'm not too concerned about it. If—miracle of miracles—this set were to be published, the cards would have to have new art.

As for Boycott, I'm testing a new version of it now, but I may be scrapping it from the set. It's likely I'd replace it with Convocation (above), but then the set would only have 4 terminal Actions (5 if you count Conscripts). I wonder if that's an issue. I suppose Alchemy only has 3 terminal Action cards, but the question is if one-shots justify that as much as Potion-costs do. I'll have to think about it more.
« Last Edit: February 21, 2013, 10:55:05 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #121 on: February 21, 2013, 10:33:40 pm »
+1

With Convocation in the set there'll be 3 Lab variants, as well as Inventor which sort of occupies the same space. I like the card but if you can get Boycott to work it will really fit in with the set, as it is definitely all about the long term strategy considerations.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #122 on: February 21, 2013, 11:20:22 pm »
+1

With Convocation in the set there'll be 3 Lab variants, as well as Inventor which sort of occupies the same space. I like the card but if you can get Boycott to work it will really fit in with the set, as it is definitely all about the long term strategy considerations.

Yeah, as much as I like Convocation, I agree that it's not the best fit for the set as it currently exists. I'm trying out another new card (Committee) to fill Boycott's slot, but I won't take fixing Boycott off the table.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #123 on: February 23, 2013, 05:47:22 pm »
0

I've been testing yet another possible card for the set. So far it seems OK. I have no idea how it will work out with a large number of players, though. Opinions welcome!

? ? ? ?
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+$3. Trash a card from your hand. Each other player may gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.

The name is still up in the air. Back in the very first version of this set, I had a card called Philanthropist, which was a $5 card that was [+2 Cards/+$2/Each other player may gain a Copper in hand]. Rinkworks thought its was too powerful and I agreed. It was the first card I scrapped from the set. I filled that slot with Monopoly, then with Boycott. Come to think of it, this is the most troublesome slot in the set.

I thought I'd bring back the idea of letting other players gain Copper. It seems like a decent non-Attack interactive effect.

Anyhow, I can't find any good art for "Philanthropist". I might call it "Almsgiver", but that might step on the toes of Schneau's winning submission to the Mini-Set Design Contest, Almoner. I suppose it could be "Patron" or "Donor", but I don't think I'll have any better luck finding art for those. If you all have any suggestions, I'm happy to hear them.

Name aside, the card seems pretty balanced from my preliminary tests, but I have some concerns. I can't tell if it's too much a solution to itself. If you have the ability to gain Copper in hand, I think that makes you want this card, since after you've trashed your Estates, you may want a bigger hand in order to offset the trashing you have to do. After all, when you're trashing Copper, this is an expensive Moneylender that helps your opponents. I could make the trashing optional. I could also bump it to +$4, but that seems obscene. I'll try to test it some more.

As usual, thanks for any feedback and suggestions!
« Last Edit: February 26, 2013, 04:21:13 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #124 on: February 24, 2013, 08:26:06 pm »
+1

One card that seems missing in a thorough one shot/instant vs delayed gratification expansion would be a card of this form:

Card:
Effect 1
(You may) trash this
---
When you trash this, Effect 2

You can play the card, but you may want to play it with a good TFB card instead, or you could use it in a pinch with an early game trasher. I don't know where it would fit (possibly on "fund") but if you do end up going for the large expansion, that would be something to consider.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #125 on: February 26, 2013, 12:50:18 pm »
0

One card that seems missing in a thorough one shot/instant vs delayed gratification expansion would be a card of this form:

Card:
Effect 1
(You may) trash this
---
When you trash this, Effect 2

You can play the card, but you may want to play it with a good TFB card instead, or you could use it in a pinch with an early game trasher. I don't know where it would fit (possibly on "fund") but if you do end up going for the large expansion, that would be something to consider.

That is a cool idea, and I have considered it. I don't think I could shoehorn it into any of the existing cards, though. As you say, Fund is pretty much the only viable option and it's already a really solid $5 card, from what my testing shows. I'm even concerned it's too powerful, since it's way better than Gold if you're only going to see it once before the game ends. But I probably worry too much. Most players can't predict which shuffle is going to be their last with 100% certainty.

I will, however, continue to keep the mechanic in mind for any future cards I design.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #126 on: March 08, 2013, 06:02:29 pm »
0

You know what I've never heard someone say? "I really like Tax Collector." I haven't heard it in this thread and I haven't heard it in my playtest games. People don't usually buy them unless I buy one first, and not always then. I also don't like the fact that it costs $6, which is hard to justify in a 12-card set that needs more $5 cards. Luckily, I have come up with a replacement card that I'm quite excited about. I hope it works out (after playtesting and tweaking, of course).

Profiteer
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. For each Treasure trashed this way, +$1.

When you gain this, each other player gains a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile.

Here's Conscripts, for easy reference:

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
Return this to the Conscripts pile. Gain a Gold. Each other player gains a Curse. You may play an Attack card from your hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

This card has so many things going for it. It's going to be a real shame if I can't make it work.
  • It costs $5.
  • It fills the trashing attack slot.
  • It has a non-Attack interaction (in addition to its Attack interaction).
  • It's another use for Conscripts, which I know at least NoMoreFun will appreciate.
  • It's thematic; supply troops to the other players, then profit from the Gold they've gained.
  • It fits the theme of the expansion and pulls Conscripts into that theme as well.
I have in the past discouraged others from creating cards that trashed opponents' Treasures and provided coins based on how many Treasures were trashed. I think it scales badly. I'm hoping that this card gets around that for two reasons. First, you're going to be hit with Curses faster the more players they are, so the fact that the card scales up faster might be justified. Second, your opponents are going to have more Curses in their decks, which makes it less likely that you'll be hitting each one as the number of them increases. If testing reveals that it scales poorly, I'll nix it.

In general, I'm guessing the card is on the weak side right now. If it turns out I'm right, I'll try letting the player gain the trashed Treasures (in addition to getting the coins) and I'll try bumping the vanilla bonus to +$3 (or something similar).

As always, comments and feedback are welcome! Please let me know what you think.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2013, 06:03:33 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4988
  • Respect: +5240
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #127 on: March 08, 2013, 08:20:35 pm »
+1

Profiteer
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player reveals the top 2 cards of his deck, trashes a revealed Treasure you choose, and discards the rest. For each Treasure trashed this way, +$1.

When you gain this, each other player gains a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile.

Here's Conscripts, for easy reference:

Conscripts
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: 0*
Return this to the Conscripts pile. Gain a Gold. Each other player gains a Curse. You may play an Attack card from your hand. (This is not in the Supply.)

So in a two player game, i will play this for at most +3$ (or, if improved, +4$) and let my opponent gain a curser that makes him gain Gold, maybe even trashing his Coppers?

Basically i think the attack hurts too little compared to the benefit it gives players on gain. I mean, it's a Thief, and Thief is not among the worst 4$ cards for no reason. I don't even know if i would care to Moat this... Free Gold and an attack at the expense of - in the worst case - another Gold? Hell, yeah. But seriously, your attack only hurts if Gold (or Platinum) is hit, and even then the hit deck has not become that much worse - i would go so far as to call it a benefit in games with good cycling (and without Platinum). Also Throne Room and moneyless Engines, Secret Chamber all the way.

Edit: I think what you should work on is the attack - only making the card better for the player "attacking" with it doesn't change that (usually) i'd gladly get hit by it.


Basically i think the attack hurts too little compared to the benefit it gives hit players. I mean, it's a Thief, and Thief is not among the worst 4$ cards for no reason. I don't even know if i would ever care to Moat this... Free Gold and an attack at the expense of - in the worst case - another Gold? Hell, yeah.

I think you're misreading the card. Opponents only gain a Conscripts when you gain a Profiteer, not when you play it. You couldn't Moat that part even if you wanted to.

Edit 2: Ooops, i really misread that. Sorry.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #128 on: March 09, 2013, 12:24:26 am »
0

Basically i think the attack hurts too little compared to the benefit it gives hit players. I mean, it's a Thief, and Thief is not among the worst 4$ cards for no reason. I don't even know if i would ever care to Moat this... Free Gold and an attack at the expense of - in the worst case - another Gold? Hell, yeah.

I think you're misreading the card. Opponents only gain a Conscripts when you gain a Profiteer, not when you play it. You couldn't Moat that part even if you wanted to.
Logged

enfynet

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1682
  • Respect: +1149
    • View Profile
    • JD's Custom Clubs
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #129 on: March 09, 2013, 01:18:19 am »
+1

Is the +$1 for trashing at that moment or for the game? Because in 4p this could be worth $5 or in 2p worth $3
Logged
"I have no special talents. I am only passionately curious."

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #130 on: March 09, 2013, 02:01:58 am »
+1

Interesting thing with Profiteer:

After everyone has played their Conscripts, for each purchase of this card:
You gain Curses equal to (number of players - 1)
Everyone else gains Curses equal to (number of players - 2)

This means, on average, it doesn't actually hurt you more to buy this in games with more players.

I like the "everyone else gains a Conscripts" thing (as you predicted :P), but it's not an effect that balances out this cards' scaling in Multiplayer.
I was also worried about Copper trashing, but this is definitely not a card you want to open with anyway.
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #131 on: March 11, 2013, 01:49:28 pm »
+1

I think the Profiteers buff that you should consider first is looking at the top 3 cards for treasures instead of 2.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #132 on: March 11, 2013, 01:54:22 pm »
0

I think the Profiteers buff that you should consider first is looking at the top 3 cards for treasures instead of 2.

Right now I'm actually testing a non-Attack version that discards Victory and Curses for $2 each. I'll keep fiddling with different ideas until I find one that works. Or I'll just stop altogether. Lately I've been feeling like making this set (or any fan cards) is less and less worthwhile. Until Guilds comes out, I worry that any card I make might be too similar to existing cards. I also feel that at this point a good expansion should have a more novel mechanic than one-shots.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2013, 01:56:21 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #133 on: March 11, 2013, 10:03:30 pm »
+1

If you do a discard-junk card, you can make it more versatile with a Vagrant-like clause.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #134 on: March 11, 2013, 11:12:46 pm »
0

If you do a discard-junk card, you can make it more versatile with a Vagrant-like clause.

If you're suggesting that I add Shelters and Ruins to the list, thanks but no. I know this isn't an official expansion, but I still don't think cards in one expansion should directly reference cards that only appear in another expansion.
Logged

One Armed Man

  • Tactician
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 410
  • Respect: +88
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #135 on: March 12, 2013, 04:30:50 pm »
+1

Another way to make it more versatile is to make it "non-Copper" or "non-Treasure" so that those other card types can be used without calling them out specifically.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #136 on: March 12, 2013, 04:47:25 pm »
0

Another way to make it more versatile is to make it "non-Copper" or "non-Treasure" so that those other card types can be used without calling them out specifically.

I was considering having it discard cards that aren't Treasures or Actions, but that wouldn't change much. Ruins and Necropolises still couldn't be discarded. It would really only change Hovel (and perhaps some future cards). It's not going to make much difference in most games anyhow.

Here's a clip from The Secret History of the Dark Ages Cards:

Quote
- I had discarding victory cards for +$2 each. It started out at $4, went up to $6, moved to Hinterlands, then was dropped for not being interesting enough.

So if discarding Victory cards for $2 is powerful enough to cost $6 (in Dark Ages no less), I think this version of Profiteer might be balanced. It can also discard Curses, but giving each other player a delayed Gold and yourself an additional delayed Curse is a pretty stiff penalty.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #137 on: March 29, 2013, 04:43:18 pm »
0

I've just made what will probably be the last update to Enterprise before the release of Dominion: Guilds.

I've decided not to get rid of Boycott yet, especially because it has quite a few fans. I was avoiding costing it at $2 for a long time, mostly because I wanted to differentiate it from Embargo as much as possible. Now that it's no longer a one-shot, that's less of a concern and I'm finally pricing it at $2.

Quote
Boycott
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+$2. You may move the Boycott marker to a Kingdom card pile.
------------------------------------------------------------
Setup: Put the Boycott marker on the Province pile. The pile with the Boycott marker is not part of the Supply. Cards in that pile cannot be bought or gained.

Instead of adding a new Supply pile, I decided to try something a little more radical: starting the Boycott marker on the Province pile. I've seen some fan cards that say, "In games using this, the game doesn't end when the Province pile is empty." This is a milder version of that. If nobody moves the Boycott marker, the game will have to end on piles. Luckily, now that Boycott costs $2, that's at least easier to pull off.

Will you buy a Boycott in order to break the seal on Provinces? Or will you wait for your opponent to do it? Or will you build a Duchy-based strategy? I'm hopeful that it will be more interesting and fun than annoying. Initial tests are promising.


I liked Surveyor as a cheap Feast variant, but it was too weak even at $2. I've made a non-one-shot version. Boy, the one-shots are just leaking out of this set! So it goes. Surveyor is exactly the same as before except it doesn't trash itself when you gain a card (which saves a surprising amount of text on the card) and it costs $4. I tried it at $5. It was expensive, and most of the cards you want to duplicate cost at least $5. You only have so many $5 buys in some games.

Quote
Surveyor
Types: Action
Cost: $4
+2 Cards. You may discard a card that is not a Victory card. Gain a copy of it.

The potential problem with it is lack of fun. In general, you want to play your good Actions and Treasures, not discard them. I suppose many trash-for-benefit cards also have this issue, so maybe it's not a dealbreaker. I could make a version that puts the gained card onto your deck, although that might have to cost $5 or put not draw 2 cards.

The other issue with the card is that it's not a great fit for the set. Where are the expensive cards that you want several of? There's Fund. I may replace Exchange with Vendor to give the set another good Surveyor combo. Exchange is OK, but suffers from, "When do I buy this?" syndrome.


Finally, I've revamped Tax Collector. It no longer trahses cards and is now a combination discard/deck mucking attack.

Quote
Tax Collector
Types: Action – Attack
Cost: $5
+$2. Each other player with at least 5 cards in hand reveals a card from his hand other than a Copper (or reveals a hand of all Copper). He discards it or puts it on top of his deck, your choice.

This kind of Attack where each other player reveals a card from his hand that you either discard or put onto his deck is one that's been suggested a few times here in the Variants forum. I've (hopefully) improved it by not allowing the revealed card to be Copper. It's an anti-Cutpurse! This boosts the power of the card and makes it resolve faster. The victim's decision resolves a bit faster because the number of possible cards he can reveal is cut down. The attacker's decision resolves much faster because non-Copper cards are usually either obviously bad cards you want to topdeck or good cards you want to discard. I can't speak for everybody, but when I play a Spy and turn up an opponent's Copper, the decision of whether to discard it takes longer than for any other revealed card.

Also, this version costs $5 instead of $6. I'm not sure most $6 Attack cards are such a hot idea. Goons is an exception because it's in Prosperity and—more importantly—it's an alternate path to victory. Anyhow, I felt the set needed more $5 cards and that with only 12 cards, a $6 card wasn't a high priority.

That's it for now. I've already updated the images and text on the front page. I may soon replace Exchange with Vendor. It's nice to have a trash-for-benefit card in the set, but I suppose not mandatory. Comments and criticisms are welcome.
« Last Edit: March 29, 2013, 04:44:58 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #138 on: March 30, 2013, 10:49:10 am »
+1

Chiming back in to state: This is my favorite fan expansion.
I love the one-shot theme. Lots of people don't like one-shots, but I think the conditional one-shot nature of the set gives a brand of tactical thinking that Dominion doesn't usually employ.
This is the only fan set that I have (as of yet) considered putting onto a table with my friends. (Unfortunately, most of them are more apt to playtest the cards they know I have made than other people's, so they haven't come up yet. I'm working on it.)

I really liked the old Surveyor. +2 Cards is usually a pretty weak effect, so I don't usually feel so bad about trashing it to get something much better. I think that putting the card on top of your deck could be a cool idea since then the card you're duplicating doesn't have to miss the shuffle. I think giving it that ability and keeping it as a one-shot would still keep it reasonable at $2.

Gambler looks really strong in terms of light trashing. One card trashing is often times weak, so the strength of Gambler is not a bad thing, I think.

Mill Town is still my favorite card of the set. It is a wonderful melding of Village and Workshop. I could see it being particularly powerful in a game with a good engine.

Clerk's action effect is pretty boring. I mean, $4 cards can't all be winners, but I would try to get its effect to be a little stronger than it currently is. How about "Look at the top 3 cards of your deck and put them back in any order. Choose one: +2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2"? Being able to hunt one card deeper would make its deck re-ordering a lot more interesting. I love the flavor of the reaction, as it makes it really strong against Cursers.

Enforcer is my least favorite card of the set. I've played with Attacks like this before and I find the effect is actually pretty underwhelming, particularly since this card is a cantrip that hinders your hand more often than it helps it. The effect for yourself is cool. I like it. My issue is that the Attack effect is not strong enough for its effect for you. What if it could force players to discard a card from a selection from their hand and then draw a card but wouldn't force them to discard anything (in case they had a hand full of junk)?
Something like "Each other player reveals 3 cards from his hand. He discards one that you choose and then draws a card or keeps them (your choice)." This would allow it to synergize in mean ways with cards that decrease hand-size.
Furthermore, trashing it usually feels bad. Maybe its Attack could occur "When you play this or trash this" in line with Noble Brigand's method of two ways to get its effect.
The card's name is also pretty weak though it is a casuality of Dark Ages. Could it possibly be Sheriff or Marshal?

Floodgate's on-gain is really nice and the strength of 2VP is often underestimated.

Barracks and Conscripts have amazing flavor to them. Barracks sifting ability is really cool to get to those Conscripts faster or any other Attack if the set actually has a nice one.

Exchange's one-shot double Remodel to hand is cool, but at the same time, it will likely be hard to use it as intended (gaining and playing Actions), particularly if it is the only source of +Action. Is there any way it could sometimes not trash itself when you play it? Maybe it could be used as a non-terminal Remodel or its one-shot option to double Remodel to hand.

Fund seems powerful. I am thankful that its +Buy makes trashing it an interesting decision (oh, and I love that you get to keep a Silver afterwards. Feodum could possibly love this). In fact, without that +Buy I would say it's a boring card that just accelerates into Gold, but since that +Buy is there it encourages building engines and other cool combos built out of cheap buys.

Inventor is clever, though it isn't a one-shot. Being able to tuck it away to get it to collide with what I want (or even when I draw multiples together) is an awesome effect. My only complaint is that "Inventor" sounds like it should provide +Cards (production), some sort of Remodel effect (tinkering with things), and\or some sort of Workshop effect (building devices). Could I recommend the name Bursary instead?

Tax Collector doesn't make me excited. Its new Attack effect is common among Fan-cards (though the exclusion of Coppers is smart). It also doesn't seem very flavorful since a lot of Tax Collectors were practically thieves in olden times. Also, the way the parenthetical is positioned makes it sound like if the player reveals a hand of all Coppers I can have him put his entire hand on top of his deck.
I like the idea of Profiteer more-- discarding Victory cards for coins-- but that effect becomes really strong towards the end of the game. It likely would not be purchased until one's later shuffles which would make the Conscripts more damaging to other players than helpful (unless it put the Conscripts into their hands to ensure that they get a chance at gaining Golds that they could use and cursing you).
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #139 on: March 30, 2013, 03:46:04 pm »
0

Chiming back in to state: This is my favorite fan expansion.
I love the one-shot theme. Lots of people don't like one-shots, but I think the conditional one-shot nature of the set gives a brand of tactical thinking that Dominion doesn't usually employ.
This is the only fan set that I have (as of yet) considered putting onto a table with my friends. (Unfortunately, most of them are more apt to playtest the cards they know I have made than other people's, so they haven't come up yet. I'm working on it.)

Thanks! I hope it goes well if you end up playtesting it.

I really liked the old Surveyor. +2 Cards is usually a pretty weak effect, so I don't usually feel so bad about trashing it to get something much better. I think that putting the card on top of your deck could be a cool idea since then the card you're duplicating doesn't have to miss the shuffle. I think giving it that ability and keeping it as a one-shot would still keep it reasonable at $2.

The issue I had with the old Surveyor is that nobody seemed to buy it, and it's hard to argue with those results. The new version at $4 is at least getting bought, although it's a little underwhelming. I'm coming around more and more to the idea of having it put the gained card on your deck, but I'll be trying a persistent version of that before a one-shot version. It's quite possible that I'll try a one-shot version of Surveyor again at some point, but it's not the way I'm leaning right now.

Mill Town is still my favorite card of the set. It is a wonderful melding of Village and Workshop. I could see it being particularly powerful in a game with a good engine.

Yes, I have seen Mill Town engines that pick up 3 or more Provinces on the last turn. It can definitely be used for a long-term strategy.

Clerk's action effect is pretty boring. I mean, $4 cards can't all be winners, but I would try to get its effect to be a little stronger than it currently is. How about "Look at the top 3 cards of your deck and put them back in any order. Choose one: +2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2"? Being able to hunt one card deeper would make its deck re-ordering a lot more interesting. I love the flavor of the reaction, as it makes it really strong against Cursers.

I'll admit that the action effect may not be the most interesting, but I doubt it needs a power boost. The deck-reordering effect is simply a side effect of putting the cards back; it's not meant to be part of the card's power. It's…difficult to describe why Clerk is as strong as it is. You wouldn't necessarily think that a card that's [+2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2] would be powerful. It seems like a weak Steward, but the ability to see what the cards are first really makes all the difference.

Compare it to a card that just gives +2 Cards. Say you play such a card and draw two Estates, and have $4 in your hand. Say you could put one of those Estates back onto your deck to bump your hand to $5. It allows for Courtyard-like tactics, but in a unique way. In fact, it's more Action-friendly than Courtyard because you can put back Actions you draw dead for $1 apiece.

Sort of like Jack of all Trades, Clerk is something you have to play to really get your head around its utility. Not that Clerk's action effect is as strong as Jack's; the reaction bit is definitely a big part of the card's utility.

Enforcer is my least favorite card of the set. I've played with Attacks like this before and I find the effect is actually pretty underwhelming, particularly since this card is a cantrip that hinders your hand more often than it helps it. The effect for yourself is cool. I like it. My issue is that the Attack effect is not strong enough for its effect for you. What if it could force players to discard a card from a selection from their hand and then draw a card but wouldn't force them to discard anything (in case they had a hand full of junk)?
Something like "Each other player reveals 3 cards from his hand. He discards one that you choose and then draws a card or keeps them (your choice)." This would allow it to synergize in mean ways with cards that decrease hand-size.
Furthermore, trashing it usually feels bad. Maybe its Attack could occur "When you play this or trash this" in line with Noble Brigand's method of two ways to get its effect.
The card's name is also pretty weak though it is a casuality of Dark Ages. Could it possibly be Sheriff or Marshal?

I guess I haven't had the same experience with the card as you have. The effect for you will hurt if your deck is cluttered with Victory cards and Curses, but it's a great asset it most engine decks, especially ones with powerful cantrips and no Copper trashing.

The Attack isn't that strong, but it's about on par with Spy. Your Attack effect is interesting, although I worry it'd cause a bit much AP as the other players have to choose which 3 cards to reveal every time. I'd rather have that attack on a terminal card.

I'd be willing to change its name, but I'm not sure I love Sheriff or Marshall. If possible, it'd be nice to have a name that still implied you had to pay the person to retain his services.

Exchange's one-shot double Remodel to hand is cool, but at the same time, it will likely be hard to use it as intended (gaining and playing Actions), particularly if it is the only source of +Action. Is there any way it could sometimes not trash itself when you play it? Maybe it could be used as a non-terminal Remodel or its one-shot option to double Remodel to hand.

Yes, I was considering something similar.

Quote
Exchange
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+1 Action. Trash a card from your hand and gain a card costing exactly $2 more than it. You may spend a trade token to put the gained card into your hand.

When you gain this, take 2 trade tokens.

I was going to wait until Guilds came out to see if its coin token mechanics were too similar to this. If not, I would develop several cards to use these trade tokens. However, I could simply make the card an optional one-shot as you suggest. I don't know if I'd keep the double-remodel part, though, even on the one-shot. It'd take a lot of extra text. I'll probably come up with a few versions to test.

Fund seems powerful. I am thankful that its +Buy makes trashing it an interesting decision (oh, and I love that you get to keep a Silver afterwards. Feodum could possibly love this). In fact, without that +Buy I would say it's a boring card that just accelerates into Gold, but since that +Buy is there it encourages building engines and other cool combos built out of cheap buys.

Thanks. Yeah, I'm really hoping Fund is OK as it is. I like its simplicity. I have some concerns about it, but that's true for all my cards to some extent.

Inventor is clever, though it isn't a one-shot. Being able to tuck it away to get it to collide with what I want (or even when I draw multiples together) is an awesome effect. My only complaint is that "Inventor" sounds like it should provide +Cards (production), some sort of Remodel effect (tinkering with things), and\or some sort of Workshop effect (building devices). Could I recommend the name Bursary instead?

I'll consider changing the name, although like some Dominion cards, my group is pretty used to calling it Inventor now. At one point it drew 3 cards and then you could trash it for a Remodel effect. The name Inventor made more sense then.

Tax Collector doesn't make me excited. Its new Attack effect is common among Fan-cards (though the exclusion of Coppers is smart).

Fair enough. They can't all be gems, I suppose. Did you prefer the old Tax Collector?

It may be a common attack effect, but I like the way I've implemented it. It works very smoothly and seems appropriate at $5 so far.

It also doesn't seem very flavorful since a lot of Tax Collectors were practically thieves in olden times.

I kept the name out of convenience because searching for art is difficult. I'd be happy to change it. I'll try to brainstorm better options.

Also, the way the parenthetical is positioned makes it sound like if the player reveals a hand of all Coppers I can have him put his entire hand on top of his deck.

Yeah, I was aware of that, but I can't think of a better way to phrase it. I think it's pretty clear and the hypothetical FAQ could easily clarify it. I suppose I could say that each player sets aside a card from his hand other than a Copper (or reveals a hand with all Copper), but that seems a little strange.

I like the idea of Profiteer more-- discarding Victory cards for coins-- but that effect becomes really strong towards the end of the game. It likely would not be purchased until one's later shuffles which would make the Conscripts more damaging to other players than helpful (unless it put the Conscripts into their hands to ensure that they get a chance at gaining Golds that they could use and cursing you).

Yes, these issues had also occurred to me, which is why I have yet to even playtest the card, let alone post it here. I'm no longer considering adding it to this 12-card version of the set, but I am trying to fix up a good version of it for when I expand the set to 25 cards.

Thanks for all your feedback! Sorry if I'm pushing back too much. I appreciate your ideas, especially those concerning Exchange. By the way, how do you feel about the current, persistent version of Surveyor?
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #140 on: March 31, 2013, 01:16:21 pm »
+1

Thanks for all your feedback! Sorry if I'm pushing back too much.
Of course you are not pushing back to much. Enterprise is your set and all feedback should be taken with a grain of salt.

I'll admit that [Clerk's] action effect may not be the most interesting, but I doubt it needs a power boost. The deck-reordering effect is simply a side effect of putting the cards back; it's not meant to be part of the card's power. It's…difficult to describe why Clerk is as strong as it is. You wouldn't necessarily think that a card that's [+2 Cards; or +1 Card, +$1; or +$2] would be powerful. It seems like a weak Steward, but the ability to see what the cards are first really makes all the difference.
...
Sort of like Jack of all Trades, Clerk is something you have to play to really get your head around its utility. Not that Clerk's action effect is as strong as Jack's; the reaction bit is definitely a big part of the card's utility.
My concern is that Clerk's reaction is hard to use since it has to be in your hand when an Attack is played and you need to have cards to trash in your hand when those events line up. Of course, that is assuming there is an Attack in the particular game. In a number of games, there will be no way to use Clerk for its reaction, so it will have to be evaluated purely in terms of its action effect which has plenty of utility, but I think could be a smidge stronger without breaking the card or infringing on other card's space.
You are probably right though. Card organization tends to be underestimated.

I guess I haven't had the same experience with [Enforcer] as you have. The effect for you will hurt if your deck is cluttered with Victory cards and Curses, but it's a great asset it most engine decks, especially ones with powerful cantrips and no Copper trashing.

The Attack isn't that strong, but it's about on par with Spy.
Most engine decks will still drop $3 to $6 in Treasures to pick up their Provinces (if not more). There are fewer games where there are enough +actions and virtual coin to get up to Provinces than those that drawing Treasures works better.
As such, discarding Treasures is generally a bad thing, so in many games Enforcer will be measured primarily by its Attack, which is frankly too hit or miss to be incredibly useful. Is there any way it could be worded nicely to allow Attackers to leave both cards on the deck?
Also, it still feels bad when you trash Enforcer: Did you think about letting it attack when it is played or trashed it the same way Noble Brigand attacks when you play or buy it?

Fair enough. They can't all be gems, I suppose. Did you prefer the old Tax Collector?
I think I do prefer the old Tax Collector (yeah, I am one of those guys who likes to trash others' cards), though I do not like $6 Attacks as reaching $6 can be moderately difficult dependent upon the table and often the Attack will prevent other players from reaching $6 as easily. Maybe Profiteer's "When you gain this, each other player gains a Conscripts from the Conscripts pile." could be appended to the old Tax Collector for balance at $5?
Though then you would probably want to give Tax Collector some kind of military name like Infantry or Cavalry to fit with Militia's hand attack and Knights' trashing.

[Tax Collector's] may be a common attack effect, but I like the way I've implemented it. It works very smoothly and seems appropriate at $5 so far.
It is a common Attack effect because it is a good idea (oh, and your implementation is really nice). It is an idea I am quite fond of, in fact, but its deck manipulation seems somewhat out of place in a set about one-shots. I suppose I am somewhat biased as the set I have been working on is actually based around deck manipulation and sifting. It is your call, really.

Yeah, I was aware of that, but I can't think of a better way to phrase it. I think it's pretty clear and the hypothetical FAQ could easily clarify it. I suppose I could say that each player sets aside a card from his hand other than a Copper (or reveals a hand with all Copper), but that seems a little strange.
Put the parenthetical at the end. It becomes rather distended, but makes it clearly separate from the rest of the effect.

By the way, how do you feel about the current, persistent version of Surveyor?
I do not like it as much. I viewed the $2 one-shot Surveyor as a place-holder: I buy it and use it until it collides with an expensive card I want multiple of, and then it vanishes. +2 Cards as a terminal action is a pretty weak effect that I likely do not want to have in my deck unless there is a Village-type that is more than a cantrip (such as Bazaar or Bandit Camp). The fact that it vanishes from my deck actually makes it easier for me to purchase, simply because I can use it until I get a bunch of better actions and then it throws itself out. If you made it put the card on top of your deck rather than discarding it, I imagine it would be a great $2 one-shot.

I completely missed Boycott somehow. I really liked it when it was a one-shot gold at $4, but moving Supply piles was fiddly and the fact that it was a one-shot meant its unique ability would be ignored pretty shortly after the game begins.
I do like cards that manipulate the start and end of the game, like this new Boycott does to some extent. I lament that it is no longer a one-shot, but it probably was a necessary change. Now its vanilla effect is kind of boring, but that could be all right.
Now I mostly worry that it can only cut Kingdom cards out of the Supply. The problem is that some really fun strategies need a variety of cards to work, but Big Money works on every table. Could Boycott allow its token to be moved to any non-empty pile that costs $1 or more? Could there possibly be more than 1 Boycott token (and disallow Boycotting Boycott)? Could it have an optional Peddler effect (+1 Action, +$1, your may trash this for +1 Card)? You set is missing one of those. Also the phrase "Cards in that pile cannot be bought or gained" is redundant and better suited to the hypothetical FAQ.
Logged

probbins79

  • Pawn
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
  • Respect: +1
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #141 on: April 02, 2013, 06:36:40 pm »
+1

I love the ideas for these cards! They are far better than others I have encountered for Dominion.  Inventor is my favorite; simple, but highly useful.  I'm surprised Donald X. hasn't made a card like this yet!  I also really like Fund and Floodgate, and Boycott looks quite interesting, but potentially frustrating!  The only significant problem I see is with Surveyor.  It is too strong.  +2 Cards and I can duplicate anything that's not a victory card? Wow! I'm filling my deck with Platinum, Goons, Expand, Bank, Grand Market, Forge, and all those other expensive cards with a measly cost 4 card! Not to mention Possession and Golem! (That could get crazy). Whoever invests in these is bound to win. Now, if it trashed itself, it would work.  Especially since you are already going for a one-shot theme.  If it was something like, "If the card you gain is worth more than 5, trash this."  Without a limitation like that, it's OP (overpowered).  Especially for someone like me who keeps his deck light.  I could buy one or two, cycle through my deck in a few turns, and be ready to boost my inventory significantly, over and over.  I would be unstoppable.  You could also make it not OP if it were pricier. Say, 7.  That makes it a bit of a gamble (as, in my opinion, most cards should be).  A prohibitive cost for some, with limited returns, but an investment with a serious payoff for others.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #142 on: April 03, 2013, 01:50:40 pm »
+1

I love the ideas for these cards! They are far better than others I have encountered for Dominion.  Inventor is my favorite; simple, but highly useful.  I'm surprised Donald X. hasn't made a card like this yet!  I also really like Fund and Floodgate, and Boycott looks quite interesting, but potentially frustrating!

Thanks! I'm really glad you like the cards. The set's been a long time in development and is still undergoing changes.

The only significant problem I see is with Surveyor.  It is too strong.  +2 Cards and I can duplicate anything that's not a victory card? Wow! I'm filling my deck with Platinum, Goons, Expand, Bank, Grand Market, Forge, and all those other expensive cards with a measly cost 4 card! Not to mention Possession and Golem! (That could get crazy). Whoever invests in these is bound to win. Now, if it trashed itself, it would work.  Especially since you are already going for a one-shot theme.  If it was something like, "If the card you gain is worth more than 5, trash this."  Without a limitation like that, it's OP (overpowered).  Especially for someone like me who keeps his deck light.  I could buy one or two, cycle through my deck in a few turns, and be ready to boost my inventory significantly, over and over.  I would be unstoppable.  You could also make it not OP if it were pricier. Say, 7.  That makes it a bit of a gamble (as, in my opinion, most cards should be).  A prohibitive cost for some, with limited returns, but an investment with a serious payoff for others.

The funny thing is, Surveyor was a one-shot that cost $2 less than a week ago. I just changed it to its current state because it wasn't a very popular card in my playtest games. Since then I've got a fair amount of negative feedback here in this thread, so I'm leaning more and more toward making it a one-shot again.

In either form, it's not as powerful as it looks, unfortunately. The fact that you have to discard the card you're duplicating really hurts. You can duplicate a Platinum, sure. But it still likely costs you $5 this turn to do so and in the meantime you've got a mediocre +2 Cards action in your deck. I first tried the persistent version at $5, but it seemed quite weak, so I bumped it down to $4.

As much as I'd rather not have two $2 cards in this small set, I think I'm going to have to return Surveyor to its $2 one-shot version and possibly buff it a little. However, I'm considering changing Boycott again. Here's the version I'm considering:

Tariff
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+$2. You may put the Tariff marker on any nonempty Supply pile.

Setup: Put the Tariff marker on the Tariff pile. Cards in the pile with the Tariff marker cost $2 more.


I think it's more interesting than outright blocking a pile, and could result in some interesting combos as well. Of course you can put the Tariff marker on cards that you don't want your opponents to buy. You could also tariff the Coppers or Estates to help your trash-for-benefit cards. You could tariff Band of Misfits so that it could mimic $5 and $6 Action cards in the Supply.

For interactions with cost-reduction cards, cost increases would always be applied before cost decreases. It's quite possible this card leads to some crazy broken combos, but I hope not. The idea seems promising.
Logged

math

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 281
  • Respect: +175
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #143 on: April 03, 2013, 07:54:53 pm »
+1

The way Tariff is worded now, it only affects cards in the pile, not cards in hands.  Also, does this mean that the first Tariff bought will cost $4?
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #144 on: April 03, 2013, 08:46:08 pm »
+1

As much as I'd rather not have two $2 cards in this small set, I think I'm going to have to return Surveyor to its $2 one-shot version and possibly buff it a little. However, I'm considering changing Boycott again. Here's the version I'm considering:

Tariff
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+$2. You may put the Tariff marker on any nonempty Supply pile.

Setup: Put the Tariff marker on the Tariff pile. Cards in the pile with the Tariff marker cost $2 more.


I think it's more interesting than outright blocking a pile, and could result in some interesting combos as well. Of course you can put the Tariff marker on cards that you don't want your opponents to buy. You could also tariff the Coppers or Estates to help your trash-for-benefit cards. You could tariff Band of Misfits so that it could mimic $5 and $6 Action cards in the Supply.
I think it is bad that the Copper pile can have the Tariff token on it. While awesome for things like Remodel and Salvager, it can possibly (though not likely) lock a player out of the game.

It's funny, but I was going to suggest almost exactly this to you in order to turn Boycott back into a one-shot. Here's the card I had:
Tariff
+$3
Trash this.
Choose one: Place a Tariff token onto a Supply pile that isn't Copper with no Tariff tokens on it;
or remove a Tariff token from a Supply pile.
Cards in and from Supply piles with Tariff tokens on them cost $2 more.
$4 ACTION
By letting it add or remove tokens, it makes the ability just as interactive (and further differentiates it from Embargo), the problem obviously being that it would allow the entire Supply to cost $2 more, so your version with only one token is probably better. I would still like to see it come back in-theme as a one-shot though.

The biggest issue I see with it is that any fun combo you want to do with it can be undermined by another player buying one and then it becomes a pretty big swingy mess if they don't trash themselves. This also reintroduces the card order problems for cards of changing long-term prices being introduced to the Kingdom.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #145 on: April 05, 2013, 01:35:53 pm »
0

The way Tariff is worded now, it only affects cards in the pile, not cards in hands.

Thanks for catching that! New wording:

Tariff
Types: Action
Cost: 2
+2 Coins. You may put the Tariff marker on any card in the Supply.
------------------------------------------------------------
Setup: Put the Tariff marker on the Tariff pile. Copies of the card that the Tariff marker is on cost 2 Coins more.

Also, does this mean that the first Tariff bought will cost $4?

Correct. I'm going to test it like that first and then perhaps test it with the marker starting off-board.

I think it is bad that the Copper pile can have the Tariff token on it. While awesome for things like Remodel and Salvager, it can possibly (though not likely) lock a player out of the game.

I see what you mean, but I'm not too worried about it. If it's a problem in playtesting, I'll try to fix it up. Honestly, I'm more concerned with a Tariff token on Silver. Although Tariffs after the first are a cheap source of coin (that can move the marker off of Silver), so it's probably not a big deal.

I would still like to see it come back in-theme as a one-shot though.

Although the set still has plenty of one-shots, it's slowly migrating toward a now-vs.-later theme. It's nice to have more than one theme in a set anyhow. Barracks, Inventor, Tax Collector, and Mill Town all fit that theme, as do many of the one-shots themselves (Fund, Floodgate, etc.).

The biggest issue I see with it is that any fun combo you want to do with it can be undermined by another player buying one and then it becomes a pretty big swingy mess if they don't trash themselves.

Well, you can still pull off the cool combos with an engine. I still have to playtest it to determine how it works in practice. As was discussed earlier in the thread, since the effects of Tariff are reversible, it makes more sense for it to be a persistent card.

This also reintroduces the card order problems for cards of changing long-term prices being introduced to the Kingdom.

Are you talking about the interaction between cost-raising and cost-lowering effects, or something else?
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #146 on: April 05, 2013, 02:41:03 pm »
+1

Are you talking about the interaction between cost-raising and cost-lowering effects, or something else?
In retrospect, that is unclear. I mean the physical order of the Supply piles. I keep the Kingdom in order by price then alphabet in order to let players see what they can afford more quickly. If a card costs $2 more, then it will need to be moved ahead of a bunch of other cards and the other cards need to be moved back. If I do not reorganize the Kingdom, I will have to deal with players forgetting the effect.

Copies of the card that the Tariff marker is on cost 2 Coins more.
With this wording, if the Supply is emptied the price drops to normal since there isn't a card under the marker. That is probably okay, but it stifles the fun interaction with cursers and trash-for-benefit since Curses drop to $0 once the pile is inevitably exhausted.

By the by, I played a game using Clerk. I underestimated how complex the decision is (but not how useful). It probably is best that it does not look at more than 2 cards. Its reaction made the game pretty tense as it was the strongest source of trashing on a table with Attack engine components.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #147 on: April 05, 2013, 03:26:06 pm »
0

I keep the Kingdom in order by price then alphabet in order to let players see what they can afford more quickly. If a card costs $2 more, then it will need to be moved ahead of a bunch of other cards and the other cards need to be moved back. If I do not reorganize the Kingdom, I will have to deal with players forgetting the effect.

Ah, I see. That's something I'll keep an eye out for when I playtest it. I'm hoping that with a large enough Tariff marker it won't be an issue. Currently I'm using the robber from my copy of Settlers of Catan.

Copies of the card that the Tariff marker is on cost 2 Coins more.
With this wording, if the Supply is emptied the price drops to normal since there isn't a card under the marker. That is probably okay, but it stifles the fun interaction with cursers and trash-for-benefit since Curses drop to $0 once the pile is inevitably exhausted.

Hmm, good call. I think I'm fine with this. It's an interesting interaction with Barracks/Conscripts, since in my experience the Curse pile often doesn't completely run out when Conscripts is the only curser available.

By the by, I played a game using Clerk. I underestimated how complex the decision is (but not how useful). It probably is best that it does not look at more than 2 cards. Its reaction made the game pretty tense as it was the strongest source of trashing on a table with Attack engine components.

Nice, thanks for testing that. How was the card overall? Was it interesting enough?
Logged

SirPeebles

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3247
  • Respect: +5446
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #148 on: April 05, 2013, 08:19:10 pm »
+1

With a clear marker, I can't see it being any more confusing than Peddler, and surely you don't move the Peddler pile during each Buy phase.
Logged
Well you *do* need a signature...

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #149 on: April 07, 2013, 04:45:44 pm »
+1

If Tariff tokens on Copper or Silver (or even on basic Victory cards) become too much of problem, I'm sure there's a wording out there that can exclude the basic cards from the clause.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4988
  • Respect: +5240
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #150 on: April 08, 2013, 08:54:37 am »
+1

If Tariff tokens on Copper or Silver (or even on basic Victory cards) become too much of problem, I'm sure there's a wording out there that can exclude the basic cards from the clause.

"You may put the Tariff marker on any kingdom card in the Supply."

I think blocking Copper should be impossible, in any case. One of the unwritten rules in Dominion is "You can always at least buy a Copper".

Edit: At least i like to think so.

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #151 on: April 08, 2013, 11:10:40 am »
+1

You have a Highway in play and the Tarrif is on the Coppers. Do Coppers cost $2 or $1? What if Tarrif is on Coppers and you play 3 Bridges?

If you have effects that raise cost, it causes ambiguous timing issues with cards that lower cost. There's no rule to say whether you apply Tarrif or Highway or Bridge first, and it matters because of the not less than 0 clause.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #152 on: April 08, 2013, 11:19:07 am »
0

You have a Highway in play and the Tarrif is on the Coppers. Do Coppers cost $2 or $1? What if Tarrif is on Coppers and you play 3 Bridges?

If you have effects that raise cost, it causes ambiguous timing issues with cards that lower cost. There's no rule to say whether you apply Tarrif or Highway or Bridge first, and it matters because of the not less than 0 clause.

For interactions with cost-reduction cards, cost increases would always be applied before cost decreases.

There's no rule to say which to apply first because with the existing cards it never comes up. Hence my ruling here. I think it's the only reasonable ruling for such an interaction.

I know how you feel, but this isn't a huge taboo mechanic, dude. The original version of Cutpurse was, "Cards cost $1 during your turn and then $1 more until your next turn." That version got canned because it didn't follow standard Duration timings, not because it raised costs.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #153 on: April 08, 2013, 12:53:12 pm »
+1

You have a Highway in play and the Tarrif is on the Coppers. Do Coppers cost $2 or $1? What if Tarrif is on Coppers and you play 3 Bridges?

If you have effects that raise cost, it causes ambiguous timing issues with cards that lower cost. There's no rule to say whether you apply Tarrif or Highway or Bridge first, and it matters because of the not less than 0 clause.

For interactions with cost-reduction cards, cost increases would always be applied before cost decreases.

There's no rule to say which to apply first because with the existing cards it never comes up. Hence my ruling here. I think it's the only reasonable ruling for such an interaction.

I know how you feel, but this isn't a huge taboo mechanic, dude. The original version of Cutpurse was, "Cards cost $1 during your turn and then $1 more until your next turn." That version got canned because it didn't follow standard Duration timings, not because it raised costs.

Oops, didn't see that you'd already addressed it. Yeah, so long as there's a consistant ruling in the actual Dominion rules (or variation-cards-Dominion rules) that addresses it, should be fine. It just shouldn't be a specific card ruling.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1169
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #154 on: April 08, 2013, 05:44:02 pm »
+1

Quote
I know how you feel, but this isn't a huge taboo mechanic, dude. The original version of Cutpurse was, "Cards cost $1 during your turn and then $1 more until your next turn." That version got canned because it didn't follow standard Duration timings, not because it raised costs.
Wait, I can play 8 markets, them cut purse, then buy all the colonies? Sweet!
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #155 on: April 08, 2013, 05:52:04 pm »
0

Quote
I know how you feel, but this isn't a huge taboo mechanic, dude. The original version of Cutpurse was, "Cards cost $1 during your turn and then $1 more until your next turn." That version got canned because it didn't follow standard Duration timings, not because it raised costs.
Wait, I can play 8 markets, them cut purse, then buy all the colonies? Sweet!

Ha ha! Whoops. In case it's not clear to everybody else, that should read, "Cards cost $1 less during your turn…"
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #156 on: April 17, 2013, 02:47:08 pm »
+1

By the by, I played a game using Clerk. I underestimated how complex the decision is (but not how useful). It probably is best that it does not look at more than 2 cards. Its reaction made the game pretty tense as it was the strongest source of trashing on a table with Attack engine components.

Nice, thanks for testing that. How was the card overall? Was it interesting enough?
Overall, I liked Clerk as written more than I thought I would. I thought its ability would be a too weak to justify 2 card draw, but it generally did feel useful enough. I have to play with it more to formulate a better opinion, as that table was good to Clerk.
My opponent was particularly fond of the card which is always a good sign.

I also played a game with Barracks and no other Attacks. I really like Barracks, but without any Attacks, we have to go off of Conscripts and the result was a resounding "meh." Because Conscripts gives out both Golds and Curses, it's hard to skip even if it is a little slow to begin with. My opponent and I ended up emptying the Curse pile and the strategy felt way too much like Big Money to me. Really, in any game without one of the power trashers (you know, Chapel, Steward, or Remake), I think Conscripts is going to be too good to pass up on.
My opponent also did not like Conscripts, though I think he believed it to be a stronger than it is.
Do you suppose they could provide virtual coin and a buy? I think that could make them much more interesting.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #157 on: April 17, 2013, 05:05:33 pm »
0

Overall, I liked Clerk as written more than I thought I would. I thought its ability would be a too weak to justify 2 card draw, but it generally did feel useful enough. I have to play with it more to formulate a better opinion, as that table was good to Clerk.
My opponent was particularly fond of the card which is always a good sign.

Nice. Thanks for taking the time to let me know how it went! This is neither here nor there, but I'm renaming the card 'Dignitary'. I'm stealing 'Clerk' for a different card that fits the flavor better.

I also played a game with Barracks and no other Attacks. I really like Barracks, but without any Attacks, we have to go off of Conscripts and the result was a resounding "meh."

Ah, Barracks. Such a tough card to balance. It has to be sometimes worth going for in games without other Attack cards, but not be overpowered in games with other Attack cards. It has to be worth using both options (dig for Attack, gain Conscripts) in both kinds of games. Barracks and Conscripts have both gone through a LOT of iterations and I'm fairly happy with how they are right now. That being said, I'm not completely opposed to changing them.

Because Conscripts gives out both Golds and Curses, it's hard to skip even if it is a little slow to begin with. My opponent and I ended up emptying the Curse pile and the strategy felt way too much like Big Money to me. Really, in any game without one of the power trashers (you know, Chapel, Steward, or Remake), I think Conscripts is going to be too good to pass up on.
My opponent also did not like Conscripts, though I think he believed it to be a stronger than it is.

For better or worse, I've tried to bring Barracks and Conscripts' power in line with other Curse givers. I'd rather err on the side of being weaker than Witch/Mountebank rather than stronger, but existing Curse-givers were my benchmark. I posit that any game with a Curse-giver and no good Curse trashing is going to end up as a Big Money slog of sorts, so I don't think Conscripts really stands out here. For what it's worth, while testing the current versions of the cards I tried a mock game of Barracks vs. Masquerade and double-Masq just destroys a Barracks strategy, free Golds and all.

Quote
Do you suppose they could provide virtual coin and a buy? I think that could make them much more interesting.

I'm not convinced this would actually fix anything. In the past, various versions of Conscripts have had +$2 or +$3. In terms of being intrinsically interesting, I think the Gold gaining is more unique; fewer cards gain you Gold than give virtual coin. But if I understand you correctly, you're saying that giving coins instead allows for the player to more easily buy cards other than Gold for a more interesting game overall. I think that's valid. However, here are some things to consider.
  • As a card that digs for Attack cards, Barracks isn't meant to be in a really efficient engine. If you're drawing your whole deck anyway, there's not much need to dig for your Attacks; they're already in your hand.
  • Because Conscripts gains you Gold, you don't have to use as many of your $6 buys on Gold. Often you won't have to buy any at all. You know your deck is going to have the Gold from Conscripts, so you can focus your buys on more interesting $5 and $6 cards.
The game you described seems like just about the worst case for a Barracks game: no other Attacks or trashers. I agree that it would be very difficult to win such a game by ignoring Barracks if your opponent goes for them. Again, that's by design to put it in line with the existing Curse givers. The one saving grace of the cards in those situations is that—if I've designed them correctly—there's still some skill in actually playing the Barracks and Conscripts. In my experience, it's sometimes more useful to use Barracks to summon Conscripts to your hand than to gain more, which isn't immediately obvious. Because Conscripts gains Gold rather than giving virtual coins, there's also a point when you don't want any more Conscripts; they're effectively dead cards if you're not going to see that Gold before the game ends. Deciding when that point is can also be an interesting puzzle.

Anyhow, it's also possible I'm misjudging the cards. I've played a lot of games with them in their current form, but that doesn't mean I've been playing optimally. It sucks that you guys had a bad experience with them. At the risk of sounding like I'm saying, "Go playtest my cards more!", I'm hoping you'll have a better experience if you play Barracks and Conscripts with some other Attacks, trashers, or any way to deal with Curses, really. Since you took the time to mock up or proxy both Barracks and Conscripts, might as well give them at least one more shot, right?  :D  I'll think more about going back to a version that gives +$3. For some reason, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving Conscripts +1 Buy. Wouldn't that be sort of tacked on? I'll think about that too, though.

Thanks as always for the playtesting and feedback! I really appreciate it.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2013, 05:06:34 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #158 on: April 21, 2013, 08:21:17 am »
+1

I played two games with Mill Town. One had Apothecary and Floodgate and the other had Stables and a decent custom draw card. They both ended just about how you think they would.
I quite like Mill Town. I'm not certain how useful its Copper revealing effect will generally be, but I am stricken with how useful it seems in any case with card-draw and no Cursers.

I'm not convinced this would actually fix anything. In the past, various versions of Conscripts have had +$2 or +$3. In terms of being intrinsically interesting, I think the Gold gaining is more unique; fewer cards gain you Gold than give virtual coin. But if I understand you correctly, you're saying that giving coins instead allows for the player to more easily buy cards other than Gold for a more interesting game overall...
...I'll think more about going back to a version that gives +$3. For some reason, I'm not crazy about the idea of giving Conscripts +1 Buy. Wouldn't that be sort of tacked on? I'll think about that too, though.
I remember when Conscripts had +$2. Gaining Gold certainly is more intrinsically interesting by the very fact you outline, but the virtual coin is not what would make buying other cards easier. Take Spoils as a one-shot Gold for example: One of the first thing one buys with Spoils is another Gold. One-shot Gold is great at grabbing the more permanent kind. Contraband, on the other hand, is a Gold with a +Buy (and card denial, of course). That +Buy is what really makes all the difference because when a player has $6 and 1 Buy he defaults to Gold but with $6-$7 and 2 Buys there are a lot more options available to him.
Furthermore, the fact that Conscripts can play Attacks from the hand is rather confusing to their Gold gaining. Gaining Gold is a long-term benefit but it detriments players in the short run because it costs them an Action and a card slot from their hands (which will decrease the value of the hand that contained Conscripts), then another Attack can be played from the hand. It is confusing when most effects on Attacks are short-term benefits like Milita's +$2 and Rabble's +3 Cards.

In my experience, it's sometimes more useful to use Barracks to summon Conscripts to your hand than to gain more, which isn't immediately obvious. Because Conscripts gains Gold rather than giving virtual coins, there's also a point when you don't want any more Conscripts; they're effectively dead cards if you're not going to see that Gold before the game ends. Deciding when that point is can also be an interesting puzzle.
My initial reaction was pretty binary: If I had Conscripts in my deck, hunt for them, otherwise, gain them. I stopped gaining them after the Curse pile was depleted. Maybe allowing a short-term benefit on Conscripts would make it boring, I really can't tell. I do know that if it has +$3, +1 Buy, copies would be much easier to collect Conscripts even when the Curse pile is empty which would make Barracks less of a dead card without other Attacks.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #159 on: April 22, 2013, 03:21:35 pm »
0

Fragasnap, I'm starting to be convinced that Conscripts could be better with +$2 or +$3. I don't think I'll add the +1 Buy, at least not right away, because that might be too much of what you need all rolled into one package.

I worry a bit that this change will make players always choose the Conscripts gain over the digging for an Attack, but I'm probably overestimating that. You still want to get to your existing Conscripts quickly in order to dole out Curses faster and get your new buys into your deck sooner.

One of the reasons I want to try it is that Conscripts with +$3 makes Profiteer easier to balance. Other players won't usually want a Gold-gaining Conscripts at the end of the game, but a money-producing Conscripts is a different story.

If Conscripts turns out to be too good at +$3—especially with Barracks as an opener—I'll experiment with other vanilla bonuses. I could nerf Barracks back to gaining one Conscripts, but I feel that would pretty much make gaining Conscripts with every play a given. I have that concern with the +$3 bonus in general, but I'll see how it works in practice.

I'm glad you like Mill Town. I assume since you mentioned Floodgate specifically that you were able to use it to advantage in that Mill Town game?
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #160 on: April 27, 2013, 07:10:55 am »
0

I'm starting to be convinced that Conscripts could be better with +$2 or +$3. I don't think I'll add the +1 Buy, at least not right away, because that might be too much of what you need all rolled into one package.
I've been playing with +1 Buy, +$2. It has shown up in two games, one with Mountebank, another with a deck manipulation Attack (though I went Double Jack\Walled Village\Barracks to surprising effect). I was much happier to gain Conscripts after the Curse pile was empty when they weren't throwing boring Golds into my deck. I rarely got to use the extra buy at +$2, but their ability to play each other made +$2 really good, particularly because I didn't have many other Actions in my deck in either game. +$3 is certainly too good. Go for +$2 and I still recommend the +Buy.

I'm glad you like Mill Town. I assume since you mentioned Floodgate specifically that you were able to use it to advantage in that Mill Town game?
Yes. I used Mill Towns to gain Floodgates in order to set aside the Coppers I had revealed with Mill Towns and further Mill Towns for a final turn where I gained 4 of the Provinces and then bought the last one.
Definitely consider some way to incorporate that combo into the recommended sets of ten.
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #161 on: June 17, 2013, 01:58:10 am »
+3

Guilds has probably made changing Conscripts yet again necessary, and you'll probably need to rename Tax Collector, but I hope you don't give up on the set.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #162 on: June 17, 2013, 11:38:12 pm »
+3

Guilds has probably made changing Conscripts yet again necessary, and you'll probably need to rename Tax Collector, but I hope you don't give up on the set.

I wasn't going to post anything for a while after the Guilds release, but since you brought it up, here's the latest news. The current version of Conscripts looks like this:

Conscripts
Types: Action
Cost: 0*
+1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. Each other player who didn't discard gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

It's extra incentive to play multiple Conscripts in a single turn, especially in a 2-player game. I've only been able to test it in one mock game so far, but I'm hopeful it'll work out well.

The card you know as Tax Collector has been renamed Magistrate, and I'm thinking about trying it out at $4. I had another card that I more recently called Tax Collector before Guilds was released. I have renamed that card Assessor for now. You can see its early stages in another thread in this forum.

Boycott is dead, at least temporarily. I stole its artwork for Exchange and put Exchange's artwork on a new card I'm about to try. Fund also has different art.

I may make Surveyor a $2 one-shot again. We'll see.

Clerk has been renamed Dignitary and has different art. I wanted to use the name Clerk for another card. I may strip Dignitary of its Reaction ability and try it out at $3. If I do, I'll try to find another home for the reaction.

I'm still (slowly) working to bring Enterprise up to a 25-card set. There are a bunch of cards I've posted to this and other threads that are in the larger version (Convocation, Assessor, the card that stole Clerk's name, a version of Wheelwright, etc.). There are some cards I've been playtesting over the last few months that I haven't posted yet, and there are three more cards I came up with in the last couple of days that haven't been playtested yet. Two of them are kind of inspired by Guilds cards, but don't use coin tokens or overpay.

Gambler, Mill Town, Enforcer, Floodgate, Barracks, and Inventor are unchanged from the versions you see in the OP.

Once I have a nice, clean subset of 12 cards that could stand on their own as a small expansion, I'll update the OP. It's tough getting a good spread of cards while maintaining my desired cost ratio (1 $2, 2 $3, 4 $4, 5 $5) and a good mix of terminals and non-terminals, though.

Anyway, I'm sure that's more than you all wanted to know. Thanks for showing an interest!
« Last Edit: June 18, 2013, 01:27:29 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #163 on: July 12, 2013, 07:43:53 am »
0

I may have already said this in this thread, but have you considered making fund:

Fund:
Treasure - $5
Worth $2, +1 buy
When you play this, you may trash this
---
When you trash this, gain a Silver, putting it in your hand.

I guess if the concept is that it's strictly a Silver with a one time bonus, then it can't work this way, but I just like versatility, especially when it doesn't ruin simplicity.

I explore the concept in my fan expansion with "Cargo", which is a $4 copper that, among many other things, can trash itself, and you gain a copper in hand when it's trashed.
« Last Edit: July 12, 2013, 07:46:06 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #164 on: July 17, 2013, 10:10:07 am »
+1

Conscripts
Types: Action
Cost: 0*
+1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. Each other player who didn't discard gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

It's extra incentive to play multiple Conscripts in a single turn, especially in a 2-player game. I've only been able to test it in one mock game so far, but I'm hopeful it'll work out well.

The card you know as Tax Collector has been renamed Magistrate, and I'm thinking about trying it out at $4. I had another card that I more recently called Tax Collector before Guilds was released. I have renamed that card Assessor for now. You can see its early stages in another thread in this forum.
I'm doubtful that this version of Conscripts will work as a Curser, but I'm probably undervaluing the non-terminal discard of it.
I like the changes to Tax Collector: Particularly the new name. At a cost of $4 I think it will be very competitive with Militia, but may need to drop the "no Copper" clause.

Quote
Clerk has been renamed Dignitary and has different art. I wanted to use the name Clerk for another card. I may strip Dignitary of its Reaction ability and try it out at $3. If I do, I'll try to find another home for the reaction.
I don't like this change as much. I thought the effects were pretty flavorful with Clerk.

I've been playing more with Mill Town. I've found that in pretty much every game where I can increase my handsize, Mill Town is just crazy. The fact that I was able to pretty much gain the Duchy pile in a 2-player game in a single turn. I would recommend taking a page from Horn of Plenty and having Mill Town trash itself when gaining Victory cards.

I continue to look forward to your updates. Best of luck to you.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #165 on: July 17, 2013, 11:02:59 am »
0

Conscripts
Types: Action
Cost: 0*
+1 Action. +$2. Return this to the Conscripts pile. Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. Each other player who didn't discard gains a Curse. (This is not in the Supply.)

It's extra incentive to play multiple Conscripts in a single turn, especially in a 2-player game. I've only been able to test it in one mock game so far, but I'm hopeful it'll work out well.

The card you know as Tax Collector has been renamed Magistrate, and I'm thinking about trying it out at $4. I had another card that I more recently called Tax Collector before Guilds was released. I have renamed that card Assessor for now. You can see its early stages in another thread in this forum.
I'm doubtful that this version of Conscripts will work as a Curser, but I'm probably undervaluing the non-terminal discard of it.
I like the changes to Tax Collector: Particularly the new name. At a cost of $4 I think it will be very competitive with Militia, but may need to drop the "no Copper" clause.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to playtest either of these yet. You could be right on both counts. I like the concept of this new Conscripts, so if it's too weak, I'll probably beef up the non-Attack portion of it. As for Magistrate (formerly Tax Collector), if it doesn't work at $4, I'll probably just bump it back up to $5. I feel that the "no Copper" clause serves to reduce AP as much as boost its power, so I'd rather keep it if possible.

Quote
Clerk has been renamed Dignitary and has different art. I wanted to use the name Clerk for another card. I may strip Dignitary of its Reaction ability and try it out at $3. If I do, I'll try to find another home for the reaction.
I don't like this change as much. I thought the effects were pretty flavorful with Clerk.

Well, the new card with this name is this:

Clerk
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a Copper from it and put it into your hand.

Who works in Counting Houses? Clerks. So the name seemed more appropriate for a mini-Counting House card.

I've been playing more with Mill Town. I've found that in pretty much every game where I can increase my handsize, Mill Town is just crazy. The fact that I was able to pretty much gain the Duchy pile in a 2-player game in a single turn. I would recommend taking a page from Horn of Plenty and having Mill Town trash itself when gaining Victory cards.

I'm definitely open to that idea. I hate stealing unique clauses from other cards, but I can definitely see how it would be warranted here. Could you tell me a bit more about the game where you gained all the Duchies? Did your opponent contest you for Mill Towns? What was his/her strategy?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2013, 11:07:13 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #166 on: July 17, 2013, 02:07:27 pm »
+1

"Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. Each other player who didn't discard gains a Curse."

I'm not sure about this; do you mean, each other player who did not discard any cards? Because, Cellar isn't "you may", it's "discard any number of cards", where 0 is any number. If my hand is already 3 cards, I can argue that I discarded 0 cards to make my handsize 3 cards, so I am exempt from the Curse. (Then there's an even nitpickier question of whether I can discard down to 3 cards, if my hand was already smaller than 3 cards?) Otherwise the only reason I can think of for not discarding down to 3 would be Moat/Lighthouse, but they would protect you from the Curse too.

Obviously it's clear what you mean.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #167 on: July 17, 2013, 02:42:47 pm »
0

"Each other player discards down to 3 cards in hand. Each other player who didn't discard gains a Curse."

I'm not sure about this; do you mean, each other player who did not discard any cards? Because, Cellar isn't "you may", it's "discard any number of cards", where 0 is any number. If my hand is already 3 cards, I can argue that I discarded 0 cards to make my handsize 3 cards, so I am exempt from the Curse. (Then there's an even nitpickier question of whether I can discard down to 3 cards, if my hand was already smaller than 3 cards?) Otherwise the only reason I can think of for not discarding down to 3 would be Moat/Lighthouse, but they would protect you from the Curse too.

Obviously it's clear what you mean.

I was aware of the possible confusion when wording the card. I opted for this wording using Stonemason as precedent. Stonemason's "if you do" does not consider overpaying by $0 to be overpaying at all. However, I think I should adopt your wording to bring Conscripts more in line with Tactician. "Any cards" is not so many words to add, and it is clearer. Thanks for the suggestion!
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #168 on: July 18, 2013, 01:36:39 am »
+1

Tactician is a much better source for the phrasing, good find. Stonemason can't be overpaid for by $0 because the rules of Dominion specifically forbid overpaying by $0.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #169 on: July 18, 2013, 10:40:08 am »
+1

Clerk
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a Copper from it and put it into your hand.
That is a cute Clerk, but I imagine too good for $2. It's a cantrip when it misses and a Peddler when it doesn't. Conditional Peddlers Ironmonger and Tournament both suggest $4 might be a more appropriate cost.
I'll look into testing it in some games.

I've been playing more with Mill Town. I've found that in pretty much every game where I can increase my handsize, Mill Town is just crazy. The fact that I was able to pretty much gain the Duchy pile in a 2-player game in a single turn. I would recommend taking a page from Horn of Plenty and having Mill Town trash itself when gaining Victory cards.

I'm definitely open to that idea. I hate stealing unique clauses from other cards, but I can definitely see how it would be warranted here. Could you tell me a bit more about the game where you gained all the Duchies? Did your opponent contest you for Mill Towns? What was his/her strategy?
Really, Mill Town is playing a lot like Horn of Plenty overall, but a bit harder to get working since you need Mill Towns and Coppers in hand.
The game in particular had as important cards: Crossroads, Mill Town, Band of Misfits, Harem
The ability to use Bands of Misfitses as either Crossroadses (with Harems no less) or Mill Towns was obviously a big upset to the game. I was gaining some early Duchies and later Harems with Mill Towns. The early Duchies didn't hurt at all between Crossroadses' draws and Mill Towns' need of discard fodder. There were some fun mind games early on with Smugglerses and Tributes (since early Harems could be countered by the use of those), but once the Bands of Misfitses were flowing there wasn't much care in gaining cards. My opponent didn't gain Victory cards as early or as rapidly as he should have been (I believe there were 2 instances later on when he passed on picking up Duchies, once with Smugglers, once with Mill Town, when I would have recommended otherwise), but we did both pick Mill Town as a key card on the board.
There was a decent draw card-- can't remember precisely what it was now, but it was really just a catalyst for Mill Towns or Bands of Misfitses dressed as Mill Towns.

On another game I used Floodgate to pass Coppers into the next turn for a Mill Town megaturn. I mentioned that one earlier.
Another game I used Apothecary to pull Coppers for gaining Apprentices which I later trashed to get my cards into hand for the Mill Town megaturn.

I've played some others where Mill Town is just a neat little Village\Workshop thing. That's cool. Even when it can be used for these megaturns that gain tons of Duchies or Provinces it is fun to play with, but when that happens it feels a lot like Horn of Plenty, so the trashing is probably necessary-- especially since Mill Town itself is a light sifter, making a little early Victory bloat okay. Either that or make it so Mill Town can't gain Victory cards, but I must confess that would make me a little sad.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #170 on: July 18, 2013, 12:00:05 pm »
+1

Clerk
Types: Action
Cost: $2
+1 Card. +1 Action. Look through your discard pile. You may reveal a Copper from it and put it into your hand.
That is a cute Clerk, but I imagine too good for $2. It's a cantrip when it misses and a Peddler when it doesn't. Conditional Peddlers Ironmonger and Tournament both suggest $4 might be a more appropriate cost.
I'll look into testing it in some games.

Well, let's compare them a little closer. Clerk's worst case is actually better than Tournament's worst case, since it always gives +1 Card, +1 Action. However, Tournament is a much more reliable Peddler early on. Clerk has a pretty high chance to whiff if you pick it up early. And of course, Clerk ain't gaining you no Prizes.

Ironmonger is an even better comparison. Thre are only two situations where Ironmonger "whiffs". One is when you turn over a Curse or Hovel, and even then you at least get to sift past it. The other is when you have nothing left in your deck or discard. Often you'd prefer Ironmonger hit a Victory card, or even an Action depending on your deck. And even when it hits Copper, you get the extra bonus of sifting past that Copper.

A stack of Clerks, on the other hand, have to stop working eventually. Either the discard pile will run out of Coppers or you'll force a reshuffle. It's kind of like Menagerie in that way. Unless you build your deck just so, they'll eventually stop activating. Even when Clerk hits, it's usually not as awesome as Menagerie.

Finally, I just have trouble picturing buying Clerk even at $3. I really think $2 is the sweet spot for the card, although I've been wrong before.
Logged

Warfreak2

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1149
  • KC->KC->[Scavenger, Scavenger, Lookout]
  • Respect: +1324
    • View Profile
    • Music what I do
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #171 on: July 18, 2013, 12:14:50 pm »
0

I think the price difference between $2 and $3 is mainly about how spammable it is, and whether you can open with it and a $5-cost. Whether it's strictly better or worse than another card is also a consideration. But otherwise a mediocre effect could pretty similarly be put on a $2 or a $3.
Logged
If the only engine on the board is Procession->Conspirator, I will play it.

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #172 on: July 18, 2013, 12:22:28 pm »
0

I may have already said this in this thread, but have you considered making fund:

Fund:
Treasure - $5
Worth $2, +1 buy
When you play this, you may trash this
---
When you trash this, gain a Silver, putting it in your hand.

I guess if the concept is that it's strictly a Silver with a one time bonus, then it can't work this way, but I just like versatility, especially when it doesn't ruin simplicity.

I explore the concept in my fan expansion with "Cargo", which is a $4 copper that, among many other things, can trash itself, and you gain a copper in hand when it's trashed.

I meant to respond to this a while ago. Sorry!

To answer your question, yes I've considered it. I try to keep mechanics specific to other expansions out of this expansion whenever possible. I'd really like it to stand alone, so to speak. To this end, Enterprise will never contain Duration cards, Potion-cost cards, VP Chip-gaining cards, Looters, cards that use Spoils, cards that get you Coin tokens, or cards with overpay.

Hybrid Victory cards, on-buy abilities, on-gain abilities, and on-trash abilities are not off the table, but I'll only use them if the card's core concept requires them or really works best with them. Floodgate has an on-gain ability, for instance, because that's the whole point of the card. Although it would be a cool twist, Fund doesn't need an on-trash ability to do what it does.

With Cargo, the on-trash ability is great because Cargo can trash any card in play including itself. The on-trash clause is a lot cooler and more elegant than saying, "If the trashed card is this…".

I think the price difference between $2 and $3 is mainly about how spammable it is, and whether you can open with it and a $5-cost. Whether it's strictly better or worse than another card is also a consideration. But otherwise a mediocre effect could pretty similarly be put on a $2 or a $3.

Agreed. Picking Clerk up as part of a 5/2 split is nice, but not awesome. It's usually better than nothing. I definitely want it to be spammable, especially since it's somewhat self-limiting. I currently see no reason it needs to cost $3.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2013, 12:24:32 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

dondon151

  • 2012 US Champion
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2522
  • Respect: +1853
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #173 on: July 18, 2013, 12:31:19 pm »
+1

Clerk also has amazing synergy with discard-for-benefit. Still not sure if it should cost $3 though.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #174 on: July 18, 2013, 12:39:27 pm »
0

Clerk also has amazing synergy with discard-for-benefit. Still not sure if it should cost $3 though.

Indeed. I have a few more cards in the works for this set that benefit from having a large hand-size, one of which is a discard-for-benefit card. Clerk is definitely meant to combo with such cards.
Logged

Fragasnap

  • Explorer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 312
  • Respect: +447
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #175 on: July 18, 2013, 12:43:33 pm »
+1

Ironmonger is an even better comparison. Thre are only two situations where Ironmonger "whiffs". One is when you turn over a Curse or Hovel, and even then you at least get to sift past it. The other is when you have nothing left in your deck or discard. Often you'd prefer Ironmonger hit a Victory card, or even an Action depending on your deck. And even when it hits Copper, you get the extra bonus of sifting past that Copper.
(Emphasis added)

Ironmonger's Village option is easily the weakest among them since you can't rely upon it to act as a Village for you. While Tournament is safely a $4 Peddler early on, you can't load up on them because your deck will be hit hard when another player has a Province in hand. The uncertainty of Tournament and Ironmonger are what balance them and make them interesting at $4. If the board lacks good Copper trashing, I can't imagine not picking up 2 or 3 Clerks at $2 a pop (which would be particularly easy with +Buys) just for the times it will be a Peddler.

And this critisism isn't even considering how well Clerk will work with different sifting cards (Warehouse, Embassy, etc.) and cards that want Coppers in hand (Coppersmith, Mill Town, etc.).

This isn't necessarily a problem-- equal opportunity would just make it a pretty good card-- but Clerk might be too much of a no-brainer at $2.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #176 on: July 18, 2013, 12:48:55 pm »
0

Ironmonger is an even better comparison. Thre are only two situations where Ironmonger "whiffs". One is when you turn over a Curse or Hovel, and even then you at least get to sift past it. The other is when you have nothing left in your deck or discard. Often you'd prefer Ironmonger hit a Victory card, or even an Action depending on your deck. And even when it hits Copper, you get the extra bonus of sifting past that Copper.
(Emphasis added)

Ironmonger's Village option is easily the weakest among them since you can't rely upon it to act as a Village for you. While Tournament is safely a $4 Peddler early on, you can't load up on them because your deck will be hit hard when another player has a Province in hand. The uncertainty of Tournament and Ironmonger are what balance them and make them interesting at $4. If the board lacks good Copper trashing, I can't imagine not picking up 2 or 3 Clerks at $2 a pop (which would be particularly easy with +Buys) just for the times it will be a Peddler.

And this critisism isn't even considering how well Clerk will work with different sifting cards (Warehouse, Embassy, etc.) and cards that want Coppers in hand (Coppersmith, Mill Town, etc.).

This isn't necessarily a problem-- equal opportunity would just make it a pretty good card-- but Clerk might be too much of a no-brainer at $2.

Perhaps. Also take into account that using Clerks means that you're not trashing your Coppers, which in general makes your deck much less reliable.

Really I don't see it as being more of a no-brainer than Candlestick Maker or Vagrant. It rarely hurts to have a couple of Candlestick Makers, and Vagrants never hurt unless you draw them dead. They're both arguably better than Clerk in standard engine decks as well, providing +1 Buy and Province-sifting, respectively (whereas in such an engine Clerk often has no Copper to draw).

The combos you mention (specifically Mill Town) are definitely intentional.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2013, 12:50:47 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #177 on: July 19, 2013, 08:08:06 pm »
+1

How often does clerk "work"? It reminds me of wishing well, except it 'works" far more often but the payoff isn't as great (it's a Peddler instead of a Lab).

Have you considered a $4 cantrip that dug through the deck for a Copper? It's just a Peddler, but if you want to stack up you can't trash your coppers, and it will have unfortunate implications for late game. All the combos that you intend for Clerk (sifters, copper counters) work more reliably.
Logged

Asper

  • Governor
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4988
  • Respect: +5240
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #178 on: July 19, 2013, 09:06:08 pm »
+1

I totally forgot to comment on my playtest of Clerk that i did yesterday...

One of the things i noticed was how unreliable it was early in the game. With a more than 50% chance of it being basically useless, it didn't help me take off very much. Even if it works out, it's basically a Silver early. It becomes quite reliable when your deck has started growing, though - that's when Clerks usually will be Peddlers. The problem is that this is the time when you'd prefer getting a 5$ or 6$. So to have a decent Clerk, you need to spend a later buy on it, or buy it while it's very unreliable, passing the chance to get another card. Assuming a price of 3$ (i played with 2$-Clerk), i think Silver will be more helpful to build an early economy. As a 2$, there's often nothing better on the board, so i'd buy Clerk nonetheless, to be amazed how it is one of the 2$s that become better as the game goes on.

Disclaimer: I playtested one of my cards on the same set, so i can't guarantee negative interactions have spoiled this review. Overall i liked Clerk better than my own card.

Edit: To make it easier to consider whether my card changed the playtest too much:
Seer, Action, 3$
Discard a card. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an action card. Discard all other revealed cards and play that action card.

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1022
  • Respect: +1991
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #179 on: July 19, 2013, 10:15:18 pm »
+2

If anyone is worried that a $2 somtimes-Peddler is too strong, remember that Peddler is sometimes a $2 Peddler.  I don't think Clerk is a problem at all; in the thin decks where you like to have lots of Peddlers, they miss pretty often.  They're also a lot worse at the beginning, when you're more likely to have $2/$3/$4 hands.  The $2 mostly just helps with picking them up on extra buys, and clearly that can't be a huge problem, since it's also easy to pick up lots of Peddlers on extra buys.
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise
« Reply #180 on: July 22, 2013, 11:32:00 am »
0

Have you considered a $4 cantrip that dug through the deck for a Copper? It's just a Peddler, but if you want to stack up you can't trash your coppers, and it will have unfortunate implications for late game. All the combos that you intend for Clerk (sifters, copper counters) work more reliably.

Funny enough, the card you described was the original concept for this card, if memory serves. I think I decided not to go for it just because of its potential slowness to resolve. In retrospect, it's probably not worse than Hunting Party or Golem, but I thought it might be a bit slow, especially once there are no more Coppers in your deck. Also it's even closer to the mythical $4 Peddler, and I wanted to distance the card from that a bit. Or maybe it was just that I had enough non-terminal $4 cards and needed more $2 cards. Maybe there was another reason I decided not to do it. I can't remember. Long story short, yes I considered that idea. I may yet go back to it!

I totally forgot to comment on my playtest of Clerk that i did yesterday...

One of the things i noticed was how unreliable it was early in the game. With a more than 50% chance of it being basically useless, it didn't help me take off very much. Even if it works out, it's basically a Silver early. It becomes quite reliable when your deck has started growing, though - that's when Clerks usually will be Peddlers. The problem is that this is the time when you'd prefer getting a 5$ or 6$. So to have a decent Clerk, you need to spend a later buy on it, or buy it while it's very unreliable, passing the chance to get another card. Assuming a price of 3$ (i played with 2$-Clerk), i think Silver will be more helpful to build an early economy. As a 2$, there's often nothing better on the board, so i'd buy Clerk nonetheless, to be amazed how it is one of the 2$s that become better as the game goes on.

Thanks for playtesting it! Glad to hear it went well. I've had Clerk long enough that I've playtested it a bit myself, and my experiences match up with yours. One of the guys I playtested it with actually wanted to jazz the card up. He thought it was too simple. I think I'm happy with just having it as a simple support card, though. They can't all be the most interesting card ever!

Disclaimer: I playtested one of my cards on the same set, so i can't guarantee negative interactions have spoiled this review. Overall i liked Clerk better than my own card.

Edit: To make it easier to consider whether my card changed the playtest too much:
Seer, Action, 3$
Discard a card. Reveal cards from your deck until you reveal an action card. Discard all other revealed cards and play that action card.

Hmm, interesting. Seems potentially quite powerful. What's your thinking behind the 'discard a card' clause? Just a balance mechanism?

Reminds me of a somewhat similar idea I had recently.

Types: Action
Cost: ?
Reveal cards from the top of your deck until you reveal 2 Action cards. Discard the other cards. Trash one of the revealed Actions and play the other one three times.

I'm not sure if it's 1) interesting, 2) different enough from Golem, or 3) fun. Just an untested idea I had.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2013, 11:37:57 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #181 on: January 14, 2014, 03:30:06 pm »
+7

Since Polk5440 asked for it, here's the work-in-progress version of Enterprise as it currently exists. In image form.


« Last Edit: February 05, 2014, 10:53:02 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #182 on: January 15, 2014, 05:05:12 pm »
+1

I seem to recall that one of the winners of the contest was a $2 Peddler that gained a Copper to your hand? I'm curious how that compares with Clerk, given how similar they are. Clerk should be a regular Peddler more then half the time that you play it (though not if you play several per turn). Whereas the other card always gets you money, but hurts your deck as you use it more.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #183 on: January 15, 2014, 05:23:56 pm »
+2

I seem to recall that one of the winners of the contest was a $2 Peddler that gained a Copper to your hand? I'm curious how that compares with Clerk, given how similar they are. Clerk should be a regular Peddler more then half the time that you play it (though not if you play several per turn). Whereas the other card always gets you money, but hurts your deck as you use it more.

I'm guessing that Clerk is more powerful than Almoner in general, the exception being when you want to flood your deck with Copper. Almoner strikes me as extremely narrow, whereas Clerk is nice in most decks that aren't trashing their Copper. So far Clerk seems like a solid $2. It's possible that I might someday bump it to $3, but it hasn't proved to be a problem at the lower price point yet.

In general, Clerk combos with Mill Town and Vendor, makes you more willing to take Copper from opponents' Wheelwrights, and makes a great target for Investment. So I like how it fits into the set.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #184 on: January 15, 2014, 05:27:37 pm »
+2

So this has likely been discussed already (I haven't read much of the discussion about this set), but I'm wondering / concerned about how Craftsman will change the other cards that use the Trade Token mechanic. Normally those other cards basically function as "2-shots". At least, any Kingdom that has just 1 of those cards it will function that way. But it becomes a different type of card once you are able to purchase just 1 copy and use it more than twice. I'm not saying that they're overpowered with Craftsman around, or underpowered without, but it just seems like the presence of Craftsman would change the actual behavior/concept of the card, in a way that's different than how you expect combos to change cards.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #185 on: January 15, 2014, 05:42:00 pm »
0

So this has likely been discussed already (I haven't read much of the discussion about this set), but I'm wondering / concerned about how Craftsman will change the other cards that use the Trade Token mechanic. Normally those other cards basically function as "2-shots". At least, any Kingdom that has just 1 of those cards it will function that way. But it becomes a different type of card once you are able to purchase just 1 copy and use it more than twice. I'm not saying that they're overpowered with Craftsman around, or underpowered without, but it just seems like the presence of Craftsman would change the actual behavior/concept of the card, in a way that's different than how you expect combos to change cards.

Don't worry about missing previous conversation. I have not previously posted the Trade token cards. Although I have created some separate threads to talk about token-less versions of some of them, this is the first time anyone has seen Craftsman, so you are initiating the first conversation about it.

As for the combos, I need to do more playtesting, but so far they seem like cool combos rather than broken weird things. Craftsman definitely puts a different spin on those other cards, and vice versa (you might buy some Jubilees in order to get tokens for use with Craftsman). The key is to make sure that the uses for Trade tokens aren't so far out of step with each other as to create a really broken interaction.

Specifically concerning using Craftsman to gain tokens for use with the other cards: at that point it's basically "+1 Action; Take a Trade token" unless you want a Poor House or a Copper, etc. I'm not saying that's never worthwhile, but the fact that it takes up space in your hand and doesn't replace itself helps balance the fact that you're making another card more powerful. Is it different than how you'd expect combos to work? I hope so! I definitely aim to provide new and different Dominion experiences with this set, rather than just a fresh coat of paint.

Side note: Jubilee is the only "2-shot". The other cards that give you a single Trade token all just have abilities that you can use Trade tokens to trigger, but none of the others trash themselves.

EDIT: Fun fact: The previous version of General was another card that both gained and used Trade tokens when you played it:

Quote
General
Types: Action
Cost: $5
Take a trade token. You may play an Action card from your hand. You may spend a Trade token to play it again. You may spend a Trade token to play it a third time.

So it was a cool Throne Room variant powered by Trade tokens. Even if it shows up with no other Action cards, you can save the token for use with a future play. Also, unlike Throne Room and King's Court, you can decide whether you want to play the chosen card again after it resolves. Say you only have one buy and you play General on a Smithy. If that first draw gives you enough money for the card you want, you can save the Trade token for later. It was a cool mechanic.

In the end the tracking problems it had didn't seem worth it. I like the current version of General better, which satisfies my criterium of "Throne that works really well with one-shots, but is still good with other cards". And Craftsman now fills the "get some more Trade tokens" role.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 05:49:06 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #186 on: January 15, 2014, 06:07:24 pm »
+3

As an aside, I wanted to share a Kingdom I was testing recently.


I played four mock games with it, testing the power of various cards against each other. My goal was usually: Beat the BM+Wheelwright deck using a more interesting engine! I was usually using a Clerk/Vendor type of deck, trashing Estates with either Redistrict or Exchange. Sometimes I would use Investment on Clerk or Vendor. I figured that that type of deck could best make use of the Coppers that the opponent's Wheelwright(s) were offering. But it took me three or four games to beat the BM deck and the key ended up being a strong Attack (as it so often when building an engine against a BM deck). I had thought that Wheelwright would be able to shrug off Axeman attacks, being that it could draw back up to 7 cards. But man, it could not.

Some cool things I noticed:

• When you get hit by an Axeman late-game, you are usually not too sad to replace that Gold with a Fund, especially if you can draw into it next turn. More money! Cha-ching!
• Craftsman is very nice when you want to quickly amass a bunch of $2 and $3 cards. Like when you're Investing in Clerks and want the whole stack.
• This is not news to me, but a big part of Enterprise in general and Vendor specifically is learning when to just destroy your deck Mining Village-style. Part of the reason my first few engines failed was that I was too eager to trash my Vendors.
« Last Edit: February 28, 2014, 02:49:41 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #187 on: January 15, 2014, 10:23:11 pm »
+1

Side note: Jubilee is the only "2-shot". The other cards that give you a single Trade token all just have abilities that you can use Trade tokens to trigger, but none of the others trash themselves.


Indeed, I thought of this wrong when looking over the cards. Jubille is a "2-shot", the others are semi-one-shots; they do something like a regular card, but their best ability is one-time (normally). Pretty cool; similar to the Myojin cycle of cards from MTG. I guess sort of like a reversed Mining Village actually... it can only be extra powerful once, but you can use it normally as much as you want. And you can continue using it normally after you've used it for it's powerful effect. Probably leads to slightly less AP than Mining Village.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 10:24:17 pm by GendoIkari »
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1371
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #188 on: January 15, 2014, 11:24:22 pm »
+1

As an aside, I wanted to share a Kingdom I was testing recently.

So I don`t see much of an engine here. Not that I really now the cards, but the easiest thing I see to beat the BM-Wheelwright is Inesting Clerks, maybe twice to make the Conspirator++ and Vendor to draw and buy.  It would suck to have to trash a vendor though. I actually think that should kill the BM strategy most of the time. You don't even need to take a lot of the coppers. Investing in a cheap chantrip seems kinda strong. Vagrant with +$2 on it? Count me in!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #189 on: January 15, 2014, 11:32:53 pm »
0

Side note: Jubilee is the only "2-shot". The other cards that give you a single Trade token all just have abilities that you can use Trade tokens to trigger, but none of the others trash themselves.


Indeed, I thought of this wrong when looking over the cards. Jubille is a "2-shot", the others are semi-one-shots; they do something like a regular card, but their best ability is one-time (normally). Pretty cool; similar to the Myojin cycle of cards from MTG. I guess sort of like a reversed Mining Village actually... it can only be extra powerful once, but you can use it normally as much as you want. And you can continue using it normally after you've used it for it's powerful effect. Probably leads to slightly less AP than Mining Village.

Yeah, Donald mentions in the Secret History of Intrigue how some people don't like one-shots because they don't stay in your deck. So one solution to that problem is to have abilities that you can use once but then keep the card afterward. Jubilee still doesn't stay in your deck, but you know. A two-shot seemed like a cool thing to have and I already had this convenient way to do it. It doubles as a very cheap way to pick up Trade tokens for use with other cards.

Fund is actually another take on this one-shot-that-you-keep idea. A Fund is just a Silver until you use its ability. Afterward it leaves a normal Silver in your deck.

As a small side-note, a couple of these images are a bit outdated. Terrace's token ability no longer draws you a card per card you discarded. It now just draws you 5 cards regardless. Better in some cases, worse in others. The main reason for the change is logistical. When you have a huge hand, you first have to count how many cards, then discard them and count again as you draw. And probably you're drawing a lot of the same cards anyway in that case. Ugh.

I think I'm going to take out Tinker and replace it with a similar card with a different token ability:

Quote
Lodge
Types: Action
Cost: $5
+3 Cards. +1 Buy. You may spend a Trade token. If you do, reveal then discard any number of Victory cards. +$1 per card discarded.

So I don`t see much of an engine here. Not that I really now the cards, but the easiest thing I see to beat the BM-Wheelwright is Inesting Clerks, maybe twice to make the Conspirator++ and Vendor to draw and buy.  It would suck to have to trash a vendor though. I actually think that should kill the BM strategy most of the time. You don't even need to take a lot of the coppers. Investing in a cheap chantrip seems kinda strong. Vagrant with +$2 on it? Count me in!

Hmm, I'll try it again with Investing in Clerks twice. Pricey, but probably worth it. It'll be a good stress test for Investment to see if it needs tweaking. Of course in that case, I'll probably have the BM player also buy Clerks once he "realizes" what's going on. Any reasonable opponent is going to try to deny you a card that's effectively a Super Conspirator.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2014, 11:38:29 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1371
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #190 on: January 16, 2014, 12:47:17 am »
+1

So I don`t see much of an engine here. Not that I really now the cards, but the easiest thing I see to beat the BM-Wheelwright is Inesting Clerks, maybe twice to make the Conspirator++ and Vendor to draw and buy.  It would suck to have to trash a vendor though. I actually think that should kill the BM strategy most of the time. You don't even need to take a lot of the coppers. Investing in a cheap chantrip seems kinda strong. Vagrant with +$2 on it? Count me in!

Hmm, I'll try it again with Investing in Clerks twice. Pricey, but probably worth it. It'll be a good stress test for Investment to see if it needs tweaking. Of course in that case, I'll probably have the BM player also buy Clerks once he "realizes" what's going on. Any reasonable opponent is going to try to deny you a card that's effectively a Super Conspirator.

Actually this engine seems powerful enough. You wouldn't mind discarding copper for Vendor because Clerk will just pick them up again from the discard. Actually this sounds fun. I'd like to know how it turns out.
Logged

LibraryAdventurer

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1225
  • Shuffle iT Username: LibraryAdventurer
  • Respect: +943
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #191 on: January 16, 2014, 02:30:48 am »
+1

I really like the concept of trade tokens and what you've done with them here.  If you somehow published this expansion I'd buy it (of course I might start using the cards anyway, published or not).

I think the Fund could use clearer wording.  It's hard to tell if you get still the $2 from the fund on the turn that you trash it in addition to the silver.
Hard to tell how well the Barrister/Domain cards would work. Have you tested the Barrister much yet? It would clearly scale in power with number of players, but probably not too much. Is there any reason that you left Domain at $0 cost?  Even though it isn't in the supply, it would seem appropriate for it to have a higher cost.
Dignitary looks especially interesting with a unique mechanic on top and a reaction that works especially well against axeman (like Secret Chamber's reaction works especially well against Swindler and Sabateur). I look forward to finding out how it works in a game.

NoMoreFun

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1447
  • Respect: +1037
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #192 on: January 16, 2014, 02:57:19 am »
+1

Why is exchange when buy, but the other trade token cards when gain?
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 03:01:45 am by NoMoreFun »
Logged

scott_pilgrim

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1022
  • Respect: +1991
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #193 on: January 16, 2014, 03:39:14 am »
+2

Why is exchange when buy, but the other trade token cards when gain?

Probably because you can use Exchange to trash, gain an Exchange into your hand, trash something else, gain an Exchange to hand, etc.  I personally think it would be fine on gain (since you have to have fuel to trash to get each Exchange), but I can understand why you might prefer to have it be on buy.

My thoughts on the set as a whole (trying to keep this as concise as possible): I like it a lot and compared to official expansions, I think it would rank as my 2nd-4th favorite (somewhere in that range).  I don't think there are any "problem" cards in the set (too weak or too strong or too uninteresting cards), which is something I don't think can be said of any official expansion (except maybe Guilds, though it's all subjective anyway), so that is very good.  The one-shot theme is very clear and well-executed, and many of them are done in unique and interesting ways.

Gambler is one of my favorite fan cards ever.  I also like General a lot, I love throne room variants in general (no pun intended), and have always wanted a good $5 TR.  General not only fits very well into the set by comboing with one-shots, but it's also still a pretty reasonable $5 TR even on boards without one-shots.

I don't like Floodgate, though I'm not quite sure why.  It makes sense that the way to do a "one-shot" victory card is to give it an on-gain effect, but for some reason I don't really like it.  If you leave everything else as is though, I feel like it should cost $3 and not $4.  The thing is, if I buy it with $4 to set stuff aside, and that stuff would have given me at least $1, why didn't I just buy Duchy?  So I'm sure you've playtested it and found that to not be an issue, but I'm at least interested to hear your comments on it.  It's at least nice for stopping terminal collision.

Investment is really cool, and you probably don't need me to tell you this, but you should playtest it A LOT.  Of course it's fine if there are some boards where it's dead and others where it's nuts, but it potentially seems like the kind of card that would either be dead on way too many boards, or nuts on way too many boards.  If it turns out to be too weak I think just giving it +$x and +1 buy on play would help "make up" for having gone out of your way to get it.  If it turns out to be too strong it will be very hard to fix.

About Craftsman gaining trade tokens: Combos are a cool thing and obviously a huge part of Dominion, but the more explicit they are, the less you feel like you are discovering something.  Imagine a Looter that did some stuff and then said "Trash a Looter from your play area."  On boards without other Looters it's a one-shot, but it plays totally differently when there are other Looters on the board.  Also it combos really well with Cultist, I didn't even think of that when I came up with that example.  But I think you see what I'm saying.  There's just something that doesn't feel right about having only a few cards in all of Dominion that make use of a certain mechanic, and then having them combo well together because of that shared mechanic.  (And I'm aware the Looter example is much more extreme, I'm just trying to illustrate the point.)  Most cards combo well together because of their difference in mechanics, because they complement each other by doing different things, and this also creates a lot more diversity in potential combos (all disappearing actions potentially combo with draw-to-X cards, that's a lot more combinations than if, say, all draw-to-X cards comboed with draw-to-X cards).  So with all that being said, I have no idea if there's any reasonable fix, I like Craftsman as it is, as well as the other Trade token cards, and having them use different colored tokens is impractical.  I just wanted to share my thoughts on that issue.

Yeah, I did a great job of keeping that concise.  I forgot to mention I also don't like Tinker, but I do like Lodge so if you follow through with that then I don't need to comment on Tinker.  If you do manage to get the set published, I would certainly buy it (even with no changes from how it is now).  I think your cards are definitely at the quality of official cards, but I don't know what would go into arranging a deal with RGG.  Good luck if you eventually decide to go through with that!
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #194 on: January 16, 2014, 09:54:49 am »
+4

I really like the concept of trade tokens and what you've done with them here.  If you somehow published this expansion I'd buy it (of course I might start using the cards anyway, published or not).

Thanks again for testing Investment! If you want to test any of the others, please do. The more playtesting the set gets, the better it'll end up being. It already has way more outtakes than cards, so it's been in development for quite a while.

I think the Fund could use clearer wording.  It's hard to tell if you get still the $2 from the fund on the turn that you trash it in addition to the silver.

I agree that it would be nice if this were clearer. It does still give you the +$2. It's definitely something I would put in a FAQ, but I'm not sure how I would change the card wording itself. Suggestions are welcome, but I'd rather have a clean, concise wording than a messy one.

Hard to tell how well the Barrister/Domain cards would work. Have you tested the Barrister much yet? It would clearly scale in power with number of players, but probably not too much. Is there any reason that you left Domain at $0 cost?  Even though it isn't in the supply, it would seem appropriate for it to have a higher cost.

I've played Barrister in a handful of games now, but it's one of the cards I need to playtest the most. I could increase Domain's cost. Really what that would do is encourage you to trash it with Remodel, etc. Which I'm not sure is something I want. It's definitely not off the table, though. It might be cool to shake things up by starting everybody with a $4 card. I'm actually liking the idea more as I think about it.

Dignitary looks especially interesting with a unique mechanic on top and a reaction that works especially well against axeman (like Secret Chamber's reaction works especially well against Swindler and Sabateur). I look forward to finding out how it works in a game.

I'm glad that you like Dignitary's top. Back when I posted just that part to a thread a long time ago (as Valet), people liked it but thought it should cost $3 or even $2. Looking at it, it appears to almost be a weak Steward. But once you start playing it, you realize how much more powerful it is than either +$2 or +2 Cards. So it's sort of, "Come for the Reaction, stay for the Action."

Why is exchange when buy, but the other trade token cards when gain?

Probably because you can use Exchange to trash, gain an Exchange into your hand, trash something else, gain an Exchange to hand, etc.  I personally think it would be fine on gain (since you have to have fuel to trash to get each Exchange), but I can understand why you might prefer to have it be on buy.

The reason it's on-buy is Fortress. With Fortress, you can run out the entire Exchange pile in one go (and keep all those Exchanges, too!). It's not often I'll nerf a card because of a single interaction. I'm not nerfing Mill Town just because of Tactician, for instance. But I feel being able to automatically run out an entire pile like that with just a 2-card combo is too crazy.

My thoughts on the set as a whole (trying to keep this as concise as possible): I like it a lot and compared to official expansions, I think it would rank as my 2nd-4th favorite (somewhere in that range).  I don't think there are any "problem" cards in the set (too weak or too strong or too uninteresting cards), which is something I don't think can be said of any official expansion (except maybe Guilds, though it's all subjective anyway), so that is very good.  The one-shot theme is very clear and well-executed, and many of them are done in unique and interesting ways.

Thanks! I appreciate it. It's easy to look at my own cards and think, "Man, maybe these actually suck." This kind of encouragement keeps me going.

Gambler is one of my favorite fan cards ever.  I also like General a lot, I love throne room variants in general (no pun intended), and have always wanted a good $5 TR.  General not only fits very well into the set by comboing with one-shots, but it's also still a pretty reasonable $5 TR even on boards without one-shots.

Thanks! General is pretty new, so I hope it works out. Seems like an appropriate $5 cost, right? The main thing I worry about is its complicated interaction with one-shots that draw (Gambler and Vendor). Play General, play Vendor, draw two, trash Vendor, put Vendor on deck. Then play Vendor again, drawing that same Vendor and another card. Then you can play that same Vendor a third time, but this time the General has lost track of it, so you don't topdeck it when it leaves play. If it turns out to be too crazy, I can change General so that it only topdecks the card if you discard it from play, though obviously I want to keep the one-shot interaction if possible.

I don't like Floodgate, though I'm not quite sure why.  It makes sense that the way to do a "one-shot" victory card is to give it an on-gain effect, but for some reason I don't really like it.  If you leave everything else as is though, I feel like it should cost $3 and not $4.  The thing is, if I buy it with $4 to set stuff aside, and that stuff would have given me at least $1, why didn't I just buy Duchy?  So I'm sure you've playtested it and found that to not be an issue, but I'm at least interested to hear your comments on it.  It's at least nice for stopping terminal collision.

Generally, if other players don't buy a card, I change or scrap it. A few cards that are still in the OP died for that reason. Floodgate is probably the card my playtesters buy the least that I refuse to scrap. It's one of my favorite cards and I think it has a lot of value for advanced players, but that value is subtle. The cool thing about it is how many different tricks it can do, not all of which are obvious.

* You can save unspent coin for the next turn. Why would you do that instead of buying a Duchy? Maybe you'll afford a Province next turn. Especially nice if you have $7 to spend.
* You can salvage dead Action cards. Say you play a Smithy and draw a Village and a Smithy. Man, put those into your next hand.
* You can make Victory cards miss the reshuffle. Whenever you have fewer than 5 cards in your deck during your Buy phase (like when you've drawn your deck), you can leave Floodgate itself and up to 4 other cards out of your deck.

And that's not to mention any card-specific combos. Think about how it interacts with various gainers (Workshop, Mill Town) trash-for-benefit cards (Develop, Exchange), and discard-for-benefit cards (Cellar, Lodge).

Investment is really cool, and you probably don't need me to tell you this, but you should playtest it A LOT.  Of course it's fine if there are some boards where it's dead and others where it's nuts, but it potentially seems like the kind of card that would either be dead on way too many boards, or nuts on way too many boards.  If it turns out to be too weak I think just giving it +$x and +1 buy on play would help "make up" for having gone out of your way to get it.  If it turns out to be too strong it will be very hard to fix.

If I need to buff it, my top two ideas at this point are reducing its cost to $4 and/or making you play the Action card before setting it aside.

About Craftsman gaining trade tokens:

...

There's just something that doesn't feel right about having only a few cards in all of Dominion that make use of a certain mechanic, and then having them combo well together because of that shared mechanic. Most cards combo well together because of their difference in mechanics, because they complement each other by doing different things, and this also creates a lot more diversity in potential combos (all disappearing actions potentially combo with draw-to-X cards, that's a lot more combinations than if, say, all draw-to-X cards comboed with draw-to-X cards).  So with all that being said, I have no idea if there's any reasonable fix, I like Craftsman as it is, as well as the other Trade token cards, and having them use different colored tokens is impractical.  I just wanted to share my thoughts on that issue.

Thanks, but I'm not too worried right now. As long as the cards can stand on their own and aren't broken together, I like that there are cool interactions between them. And this sort of rare interaction does already exist in Dominion, for what it's worth. Butcher can play a lot differently when there are other Coin-token cards on the board. You're much more willing to use it for huge upgrades.

I think it's worth saying that I didn't create Craftsman specifically so that it would combo with these other cards. It was just a cool thing I could do with Trade tokens. Also note that even without Craftsman, you have these sorts of combos. You might buy Jubilees because they're a cheap way to get Trade tokens for Lodge.

I agree that it's cooler to have combos that you can discover rather than ones that hit you over the head. But I think Enterprise has plenty of subtle combos too, and that those aren't lessened by having some blatant ones. And what's obvious to one person may not be obvious to another.

If you do manage to get the set published, I would certainly buy it (even with no changes from how it is now).  I think your cards are definitely at the quality of official cards, but I don't know what would go into arranging a deal with RGG.  Good luck if you eventually decide to go through with that!

Thanks again! If I were to try to get it published, I'd be going through Donald first. For one thing he owns the rights to Dominion, but much more importantly I can't imagine trying to go over his head. He's always been there with answers to questions about rules and Dominion's design considerations. Without his secret histories and other essays on Dominion, there is no way this set would be as good as it is.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 10:00:06 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #195 on: January 16, 2014, 02:31:20 pm »
0

I just updated the image post.

Removed: Tinker
Added: Lodge
Updated: Terrace

Now I just need three more cards and perhaps replacements for some of the off-theme cards.
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1371
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #196 on: January 16, 2014, 03:03:05 pm »
+1

I just updated the image post.

Removed: Tinker
Added: Lodge
Updated: Terrace

Now I just need three more cards and perhaps replacements for some of the off-theme cards.

Off theme cards are ok. You need some balance. A set of all one shots is hard because they may not be great for engines, only mega turns.
Logged

GendoIkari

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7713
  • Respect: +8569
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #197 on: January 16, 2014, 03:18:15 pm »
+1

Fund is actually another take on this one-shot-that-you-keep idea. A Fund is just a Silver until you use its ability. Afterward it leaves a normal Silver in your deck.


Would Fund be overpowered if it used Trade tokens instead?

Treasure - $5
+$2
When you play this, you may spend a Trade Token. If you do, +$2, +1 buy
____
When you gain this, gain a Trade Token.

The effect is almost identical to the version you have if no other cards with Trade Tokens are around; it's slightly stronger because if you buy 2 of them, after you've used the effect once, you can use it the second time no matter which one you draw.

I was just thinking that if that's not overpowered, then it would fit in with the set better because of more Trade Token cards.
Logged
Check out my F.DS extension for Chrome! Card links; Dominion icons, and maybe more! http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=13363.0

Thread for Firefox version:
http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=16305.0

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #198 on: January 16, 2014, 03:36:03 pm »
0

Fund is actually another take on this one-shot-that-you-keep idea. A Fund is just a Silver until you use its ability. Afterward it leaves a normal Silver in your deck.


Would Fund be overpowered if it used Trade tokens instead?

Treasure - $5
+$2
When you play this, you may spend a Trade Token. If you do, +$2, +1 buy
____
When you gain this, gain a Trade Token.

The effect is almost identical to the version you have if no other cards with Trade Tokens are around; it's slightly stronger because if you buy 2 of them, after you've used the effect once, you can use it the second time no matter which one you draw.

I was just thinking that if that's not overpowered, then it would fit in with the set better because of more Trade Token cards.

I could do this. I do want more Trade token cards. On the other hand, I think Fund is really cute as-is and I also want to have a good number of actual one-shots. This version also doesn't combo with Refurbish the way the current version does. Or with Rogue/Graverobber, for that matter.

If there's one off-theme card I could scrap, Refurbish is probably it. Maybe Convocation. If Refurbish leaves the set, I will take a more serious look at a Trade token version of Fund.
« Last Edit: January 16, 2014, 03:37:14 pm by LastFootnote »
Logged

mail-mi

  • Saboteur
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1112
  • Shuffle iT Username: mail-mi
  • Come play some Forum Mafia with us!
  • Respect: +1169
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #199 on: January 17, 2014, 12:24:42 am »
+2

I just updated the image post.

Removed: Tinker
Added: Lodge
Updated: Terrace

Now I just need three more cards and perhaps replacements for some of the off-theme cards.

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Logged
I currently imagine mail-mi wearing a dark trenchcoat and a bowler hat, hunched over a bit, toothpick in his mouth, holding a gun in his pocket.  One bead of sweat trickling down his nose.

'And what is it that ye shall hope for? Behold I say unto you that ye shall have hope through the atonement of Christ and the power of his resurrection, to be raised unto life eternal, and this because of your faith in him according to the promise." - Moroni 7:41, the Book of Mormon

Nic

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 138
  • Respect: +85
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #200 on: January 17, 2014, 01:22:15 am »
+1

I just updated the image post.

Removed: Tinker
Added: Lodge
Updated: Terrace

Now I just need three more cards and perhaps replacements for some of the off-theme cards.

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Redistrict?
Logged

manthos88

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116
  • Respect: +43
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #201 on: January 17, 2014, 07:42:30 am »
+1

I generally like most of your cards. But some of them look a little weird to me.

For example, Jubilee: Why would i want to buy this for $2 (over another $2, perhaps)? Would i want to buy this for $3 or $4?

Domain: It looks to me that when Domain is on the board, you probably want to force a Domain race, because i'm pretty sure that i wouldn't want to give my opponent a 8*8=64 VP lead. So, what's the deal here? Bump up with +Buys and go for the race? Also, this becomes a lot more interesting with Barrister on the board i suppose, which is an OK card i feel.

Committee: This one looks like really strong card. I'm pretty sure it should cost $5.

Wheelwright: Looks very strong, but has a drawback. Gaining a Copper IS something in this set. I'm just not sure whether the drawback is good enough versus the benefit it offers.

Dignitary: This is the most strange of your cards, as i see it. Now, when would i want to buy this? The reaction part looks nice and unique. But is the Action part good enough to compensate? And is it worth it at $4? Yeah, you can draw 2 cards and you can save a dead Action while getting +$1. That's nice. But what can i generally do with this card? I don't think i could ever go for something like Dignitary-BM.

Convocation: Strange filtering mechanism. I'm not sure whether i like it. I also need some clarifications about double-type Victory cards. If i reveal a Great Hall, an Action and a Victory card and opt to put the Great Hall in my hand, do i discard the other 2 cards? Does the order in which i make the choices matter?


I also feel like you should include one more card that can produce Trade Tokens (Craftsman style). Because, it would be better to give those cards with this one-shot theme a chance to use more Trade Tokens for this "cool effect". Also, Craftsman makes good use of the Tokens by itself. Maybe you would want to create another card that can produce Tokens and be more happy to give them to another card. Additionally, this way, there will be more chances that a card that produces Trade Tokens can be appeared in a given Kingdom.

Now, that is merely my opinion. You did the playtesting. You know better.
Logged
Just give me a mega-turn engine and take my soul...

LastFootnote

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7041
  • Shuffle iT Username: LastFootnote
  • Respect: +9747
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #202 on: January 17, 2014, 09:20:44 am »
+1

Have you tried a card with a "You may trash this card" clause and an on-trash effect? That could work pretty well here.
Redistrict?

Could you be more specific? I'm not sure how Redistrict could fit this idea. In general, though, this mechanic is something I'm open to having in the set.

For example, Jubilee: Why would i want to buy this for $2 (over another $2, perhaps)? Would i want to buy this for $3 or $4?

It's cheap economy and can be used as a temporary village in a pinch. In some games you need Silver to get off the ground, but would rather not have the Silver in your deck later. Jubilee is especially useful in those games. That being said, it's one of the cards that's had the least playtesting. It may be a dud.

Domain: It looks to me that when Domain is on the board, you probably want to force a Domain race, because i'm pretty sure that i wouldn't want to give my opponent a 8*8=64 VP lead. So, what's the deal here? Bump up with +Buys and go for the race? Also, this becomes a lot more interesting with Barrister on the board i suppose, which is an OK card i feel.

I'm sorry the images don't make this clear, but Domain isn't a Kingdom card. You know how Barrister's setup gives each player a Domain in place of a starting Copper? Those are the only Domains in the game. You have to get them from your opponents.

The reason they don't say "This is not in the Supply" is the same reason Shelters don't; there's never going to be a stack of them sitting on the table that someone might think they could buy.

Committee: This one looks like really strong card. I'm pretty sure it should cost $5.

I was originally $5. I'm trying it at $4 and I really hope it works at that cost. I feel like it's significantly more compelling at that price point and that it needs that extra push. I don't think it's quite as strong as it looks, but it's possible that it'll have to cost $5 after more playtesting.

Wheelwright: Looks very strong, but has a drawback. Gaining a Copper IS something in this set. I'm just not sure whether the drawback is good enough versus the benefit it offers.

Could be you're right. The consensus among the playtesters is also that it looks strong. So far it's been OK, I think. Although it gives you the discard filter, there's nothing stopping you from drawing dead cards. You can even draw the ones you just discarded, à la Cellar.

As far as gaining a Copper in hand, I think it's more powerful than many realize, especially early on. If I'm sometimes willing to pay $5 and gain two Coppers for a Gold (Cache), I'm probably willing to gain a Copper to get from $4 to $5.

Dignitary: This is the most strange of your cards, as i see it. Now, when would i want to buy this? The reaction part looks nice and unique. But is the Action part good enough to compensate? And is it worth it at $4? Yeah, you can draw 2 cards and you can save a dead Action while getting +$1. That's nice. But what can i generally do with this card? I don't think i could ever go for something like Dignitary-BM.

Perhaps not. It makes a decent opener, though. And against most Attacks it's a nice Reaction.

Convocation: Strange filtering mechanism. I'm not sure whether i like it. I also need some clarifications about double-type Victory cards. If i reveal a Great Hall, an Action and a Victory card and opt to put the Great Hall in my hand, do i discard the other 2 cards? Does the order in which i make the choices matter?

Man, I made the Convocation wording as clear as I could. You do the instructions one at a time, like any card. First choose an Action card. Presumably you choose the one that isn't Great Hall. Then you choose a Treasure card, but there isn't one. Then you choose a Victory card. Presumably you choose the Great Hall. Then you discard the other Victory card. You could of course do this differently if you prefer to draw the dead Victory card instead of the Action card for some reason.

I also feel like you should include one more card that can produce Trade Tokens (Craftsman style). Because, it would be better to give those cards with this one-shot theme a chance to use more Trade Tokens for this "cool effect". Also, Craftsman makes good use of the Tokens by itself. Maybe you would want to create another card that can produce Tokens and be more happy to give them to another card. Additionally, this way, there will be more chances that a card that produces Trade Tokens can be appeared in a given Kingdom.

I appreciate the thought, but this is pretty much the opposite of what I want to do. Any card that produces Trade tokens has to have a good use for them or it'll just be a dead card on boards without other Trade token cards. I usually play with cards from one or two sets at a time, but for people who play full random, such a card would be a dud in almost every game.

Thanks for the questions and comments!
« Last Edit: January 17, 2014, 09:22:05 am by LastFootnote »
Logged

KingZog3

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3163
  • Respect: +1371
    • View Profile
Re: Dominion: Enterprise (Beta)
« Reply #203 on: January 17, 2014, 01:51:53 pm »
+2

I don't think Jubilee is a dud. It seems like an ok pickup near he end of the game. Pearl Diver exists, and it's essentially a dud, and Jubilee is far more interesting.
Logged

manthos88

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 116