Print

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

[Augie279]

A set with a theme of cards doing things when you're not playing them. The Tokens from Garrison are handy, aren't they? Probably a pain to play a set of all this in person but eh, thank goodness for the online client being able to deal with all that.

Some rules clarifications because this set needs a lot of them:
-Duration cards with Tokens on them stay in play until the end of the first turn they have no Tokens on them.
-Depot's Treasure buy is not optional. You must buy a Treasure if you are able to. This doesn't cost a Buy, like Black Market.
-Reserves's Reaction activates if you discard it during Clean-Up if it's still in your hand.
-Draw-to-X still works with Night Shift.

Closed my eyes at 11 PM and when I woke up at 1:30 AM this set was finished. Enjoy! Not the best fan card creator so constructive criticism is appreciated.

[grrgrrgrr]

Looks cool overall. Somethings I notices so far:
a) You used "while this is play" on two cards, making it work incorrectly with BoM/Overlord. For neither card, this is necessary.
b) What sets Reserves apart from Patron? Also, are you aware why Patron's ability is now restricted to the Action phase?
c) Depot should use "you may"

[Augie279]

a) Mistake on my end, sorry.
b) Reserves is on-discard while Patron is on-reveal. You're giving up the $2 for +1 Coffers.
c) Intended to be mandatory. Should probably have added a (or reveal you can't) clause.

[emtzalex]

a) The mock-ups for your Treasure cards should have a "Preview" showing the amount of $ they will produce in their top corners. For example:
https://shardofhonor.github.io/dominion-card-generator/index.html?title=Reserves&description=%242%0A-%0AWhen%20you%20discard%20this%20other%20than%20from%20play%2C%20%2B1%20Coffers.&type=Treasure%20-%20Reaction&credit=&creator=&price=%244&preview=%242&type2=&color2split=1&boldkeys=&picture-x=0&picture-y=0&picture-zoom=1&picture=&expansion=&custom-icon=&color0=3&color1=2&size=0

b) I'm not sure Steampunk Village should cost $4. While not strictly worse than Village, it's not strictly better either, and you need to play 4 of them before you get more +Actions than you would from the same number of copies of a regular Village. In most games, that's going to happen a lot less often than getting just 1 of them, in which case SPV is substantially worse than Village. In a well running engine, you may well play 4 villages every turn; but even then, SPV doesn't provide the extra Action to start playing your terminal draw cards until you get a 2nd one.

[GendoIkari]

Jeweler could be in a Kingdom with no way to gain cards... if it doesn't let you gain cards by itself, then it could be in a split pile with a card that gains cards, etc. Though if so it should also have +1 action (unless there's a village in that same split pile also).

Robber appears too harsh if there's no limit on it. You overbuild your engine so that you have $13 to spend but only 1 buy, so now you just have to skip your entire next turn?

Combine should probably just count cost. and are each specific to 1 expansion, and not used in this expansion.

Comparing Labor Force to Storyteller, and then Caravan to Laboratory, it seems to me like Labor Force would be pretty much balanced if it also had +1 action... that should make it as close to Caravan in strength as Storyteller is to Laboratory. If I'm even close to right, it would be really weak as is.

Rackhouse feels like the wording should be reversed... since discarding a card is bad and removing tokens is good, you would generally think of it in terms of "discard a card to remove a token", not "remove a token to discard a card". I get that it's different in the case where yo have 0 cards in hand, but that seems like a pretty rare situation after resolving an action card.

[emtzalex]

Robber appears too harsh if there's no limit on it. You overbuild your engine so that you have $13 to spend but only 1 buy, so now you just have to skip your entire next turn?

Remember, though, that you don't have to play all of your Treasure cards. So unless more than $8 of the $13 comes from peddler variants that you need to play to cycle though your deck, you can just leave the payload in your hand (unless you are also being hit with Haunted Woods). If anything, Robber's attack is a bit on the weak side, as it will usually only impact you to the extent your least productive Treasure gives you more $ than you need (e.g. if you have $1 from your Actions and nothing but Gold and you only need $8, you will end up penalized 2 cards). And will frequently be rendered useless with +Buy.

[GendoIkari]

Robber appears too harsh if there's no limit on it. You overbuild your engine so that you have $13 to spend but only 1 buy, so now you just have to skip your entire next turn?

Remember, though, that you don't have to play all of your Treasure cards. So unless more than $8 of the $13 comes from peddler variants that you need to play to cycle though your deck, you can just leave the payload in your hand (unless you are also being hit with Haunted Woods). If anything, Robber's attack is a bit on the weak side, as it will usually only impact you to the extent your least productive Treasure gives you more $ than you need (e.g. if you have $1 from your Actions and nothing but Gold and you only need $8, you will end up penalized 2 cards). And will frequently be rendered useless with +Buy.

Yeah I agree that it's not a common issue, it just feels like it over-punishes bad play. I mean if you play a Mountebank Kingdom poorly, you probably end up with 10 Curses and at least 17 Copper in your deck, but you still get to play your turns like normal. Just imagine a scenario where you don't notice or pay attention to the fact that your opponent played a Robber, and you play out your deck like normal. That one little mistake (which may be pretty easy to do depending on the type of game you're playing) just means you get no turn.

[Aureustgo]

Remember, though, that you don't have to play all of your Treasure cards. So unless more than $8 of the $13 comes from peddler variants that you need to play to cycle though your deck, you can just leave the payload in your hand (unless you are also being hit with Haunted Woods). If anything, Robber's attack is a bit on the weak side, as it will usually only impact you to the extent your least productive Treasure gives you more $ than you need (e.g. if you have $1 from your Actions and nothing but Gold and you only need $8, you will end up penalized 2 cards). And will frequently be rendered useless with +Buy.

I think a bigger issue is that: 1) it doesn't feel like an interesting decision. It would be revealing to see how it plays, but I could imagine it just being a time-waster ("do I buy this, and get 1 less card, or do I buy that and get two less cards. Oh wait, what if I buy both this and this, and only lose 1 card") all for a relatively small effect on the game; 2) "robber," to the extent its in line with thief and bandit, should steal treasure not cards. Perhaps one could come up with another malevolent thing that takes cards (directly).

Also, if this is an expansion, and admittedly I didn't count everything, but Donald X. usually hopes it can be self-sustaining to some degree - a 25-card set like this usually has three villages, about 3 or so attacks, and the like. Your set appears heavily skewed away from this. Perhaps that's intentional, but might be nevertheless worth thinking about.

[Joxeft]

Stocks wording is messed up. At the start of each of your turns if this has 4 or less tokens on it, add a token to this. Also i think that samurai is to weak maby make it cost $5 or add a benefit.

[Schachspieler16]

Dredge seems very weak. Compare it too encampment which give +2 actions +2 cards, and has a built in way to avoid returning the card to the pile. If it's a one shot for 2 dollars, I would make it more like +2 actions +1 buy +$2 trash this. It seems like it needs a bit more if it's a one shot.