Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit  (Read 4994 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

segura

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1529
  • Respect: +1424
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #50 on: December 05, 2022, 01:35:07 pm »
+1

On a $3 or $4 mandatory trashing increases the price, because it's very useful in the beginning of the game, but when you can afford and play a $7 card, the game is already very close to the end (and there is a high chance that your junk is already trashed), so the trashing becomes a net negative.
Forge disagrees with you.
You gonna strive hard to hit $7 and then you got payload, draw and trashing in your deck. Sounds like a sweet deal, this is kind of what Saunavanto does.
Logged

majiponi

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 823
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #51 on: December 05, 2022, 05:07:51 pm »
0

Soldiers Village
cost $2 - Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may play an Attack card from your hand.
---
When you gain this, gain another Soldiers Village (that doesn't come with another).

Armed Smithy
cost $7* - Action - Attack
+3 Cards
+1 Buy
Each other player discards an Action or an Treasure (or reveals they can't), and draws until they have 4 cards in hand.
---
This costs $1 less per an Attack card you have in play.


8 Soldiers Villages are on 4 Armed Smithies.

EDIT: cost changed ($6 was too easy to gain).

Does Soldier's Village need the attack type? It doesn't appear to attack at all

I wanted to make it's Supply an Action-Attack pile and reduce Armed Smithy's cost cheaper when Soldiers Village is played.
Logged

majiponi

  • Jester
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 823
  • Respect: +734
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #52 on: December 05, 2022, 05:11:04 pm »
+2



This wording won't work.  It means

Choose one:  reveal; or gain.

You can choose an option you can't do.  You should write

You may reveal; if you don't, gain.
Logged

Gubump

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #53 on: December 05, 2022, 07:39:01 pm »
+1



This wording won't work.  It means

Choose one:  reveal; or gain.

You can choose an option you can't do.  You should write

You may reveal; if you don't, gain.

Plus it doesn't specify where opponents reveal from.
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Shard of Honor and his Dominion Card Image Generator (the new fork).
If you're having font issues with the generator, click this link and click on the button to request temporary access to the demo server that loads the font.

NoMoreFun

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2006
  • Respect: +2110
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #54 on: December 05, 2022, 07:39:23 pm »
+1

Soldiers Village
cost $2 - Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may play an Attack card from your hand.
---
When you gain this, gain another Soldiers Village (that doesn't come with another).

Armed Smithy
cost $7* - Action - Attack
+3 Cards
+1 Buy
Each other player discards an Action or an Treasure (or reveals they can't), and draws until they have 4 cards in hand.
---
This costs $1 less per an Attack card you have in play.


8 Soldiers Villages are on 4 Armed Smithies.

EDIT: cost changed ($6 was too easy to gain).

There's no hard and fast rules about what should or shouldn't be an Attack, but Soldier's Village doesn't need to be an Attack. It could be worth putting in a weak attack if you don't play one, or if you play an Armed Smithy or Soldiers Village with it.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2022, 08:46:16 pm by NoMoreFun »
Logged

LTaco

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Shuffle iT Username: LTaco
  • Respect: +127
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #55 on: December 06, 2022, 09:54:33 am »
+1



This wording won't work.  It means

Choose one:  reveal; or gain.

You can choose an option you can't do.  You should write

You may reveal; if you don't, gain.

Copying Torturer the text would be:
Reveal a card from your hand. Each other player either reveals a copy of it from their hand or gains a Curse, their choice. (They may pick an option they can't do.)

Isn´t "their choice" and everything after that implicit?
Logged

SignError

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Shuffle iT Username: SignError
  • Respect: +230
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #56 on: December 06, 2022, 10:17:17 am »
+1



This wording won't work.  It means

Choose one:  reveal; or gain.

You can choose an option you can't do.  You should write

You may reveal; if you don't, gain.

Copying Torturer the text would be:
Reveal a card from your hand. Each other player either reveals a copy of it from their hand or gains a Curse, their choice. (They may pick an option they can't do.)

Isn´t "their choice" and everything after that implicit?

With Torturer, once the Curses run out, you can avoid the “discard 2 cards” option by always choosing the “gain a Curse” option, even though you fail to actually gain a Curse.  Likewise, as long as you use Torturer’s wording on Rebuke, a player can choose the “reveals a copy of it from their hand” option, even if they don’t actual have a copy in their hand to reveal.

So instead of copying Torturer’s wording, the wording can be copied from Gladiator and Mountebank, producing something like this:  “Reveal a card from your hand. Each other player may reveal a copy from their hand. If they do not, they gain a Curse.”
« Last Edit: December 06, 2022, 10:41:05 am by SignError »
Logged

kru5h

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
  • Respect: +372
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #57 on: December 06, 2022, 10:55:09 am »
+2

Dawn of the Final Day

24 Hours Remain

kru5h

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
  • Respect: +372
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #58 on: December 06, 2022, 10:57:24 am »
0

Soldiers Village
cost $2 - Action - Attack
+1 Card
+1 Action
You may play an Attack card from your hand.
---
When you gain this, gain another Soldiers Village (that doesn't come with another).

Armed Smithy
cost $7* - Action - Attack
+3 Cards
+1 Buy
Each other player discards an Action or an Treasure (or reveals they can't), and draws until they have 4 cards in hand.
---
This costs $1 less per an Attack card you have in play.


8 Soldiers Villages are on 4 Armed Smithies.

EDIT: cost changed ($6 was too easy to gain).

There's no hard and fast rules about what should or shouldn't be an Attack, but Soldier's Village doesn't need to be an Attack. It could be worth putting in a weak attack if you don't play one, or if you play an Armed Smithy or Soldiers Village with it.

It could also be fixed by adding a new type, like "Military" or something. Then change the card to, "You may play a Military or Attack card from your hand."

LTaco

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 44
  • Shuffle iT Username: LTaco
  • Respect: +127
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #59 on: December 06, 2022, 03:59:20 pm »
+4



Updated version of Rebuke.
Logged

J410

  • Scout
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
  • Shuffle iT Username: J410
  • Smile! =J
  • Respect: +73
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #60 on: December 06, 2022, 04:40:42 pm »
0

Vizier
$2 - Action - Attack
+1 Card
Each other player takes their -1 Action token.

-1 Action token
When you have 2 or more Actions (or when you end your turn), lose 1 Action and lose this.

Got an Action to spare? You can now remove it, forcing your opponents to do the same. Make sure you got extra villages in your deck with this in the kingdom. Or don't use villages at all. You can't get 1 Action less when you end your turn, so you just lose the token then. Being a ruined library with an attack, this card probably won't see much play, but its presence alone should be enough to alter strategy.
Edit: weakened the token to not shut down cantrips
« Last Edit: December 07, 2022, 10:26:39 am by J410 »
Logged

Gubump

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1532
  • Shuffle iT Username: Gubump
  • Respect: +1677
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #61 on: December 06, 2022, 07:35:55 pm »
+7

« Last Edit: December 06, 2022, 07:49:04 pm by Gubump »
Logged
All of my fan card mockups are credited to Shard of Honor and his Dominion Card Image Generator (the new fork).
If you're having font issues with the generator, click this link and click on the button to request temporary access to the demo server that loads the font.

xyz123

  • Apprentice
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 294
  • Respect: +511
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #62 on: December 07, 2022, 02:55:01 am »
+1

A slight change to my earlier entry which I withdrew.

Consul
Action-Reserve-Attack
$2

+1 Action
$2

Reveal a card from your hand. Each other player discards a copy of the card (or reveals a hand with no copies).
Put this on your tavern mat.
_______________________________________________________________________________________
At the start of your turn you may take 1 Debt to discard this from your tavern mat.


Notes
- I wanted to bring back an Ambassador type attack which involved revealing a card from your hand.
- I also wanted to make a Reserve-Attack, but the feedback on my initial entry showed why a card that attacks when called doesn't work. Instead I took inspiration from Wine Merchant and decided instead of attacking on call, you have to pay to get it back from your tavern mat. This also means the card should cost less, meaning a more powerful card can fit the $2 cost requirement.
Logged

kru5h

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
  • Respect: +372
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #63 on: December 07, 2022, 10:55:09 am »
+5

Contest Closed

Entries:

BryGuy with Silver Thief/Gold Thief
Builder_Roberts with Retired Militia
AJL828 with Broomstick
sumrex with The Legend of Night and Day
4est with School of Witchcraft
JW with Malevolent Witch
Augie279 with Picket (Split Necklace was retracted)
X-tra with Brats
NoMoreFun with Usurper
majiponi with Soldiers Village/Armed Smithy
n_sanity with Burglar
czzzz with Tree Giant
arowdok with Eternal Struggle
Xen3k with Goblin Village
Erick648 with Almoner
SignError with Faun
nagdon with Battle Witch
emtzalex with Dragon
Ltaco with Rebuke
J410 with Vizier
Gubump with Assassin
xyz123 with Consul

If there are any errors, please let me know within 24 hours.
Judging will begin after that and may take a few hours.

Thank you.
« Last Edit: December 07, 2022, 11:10:12 am by kru5h »
Logged

kru5h

  • Duke
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 393
  • Respect: +372
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #64 on: December 08, 2022, 12:00:02 pm »
+9

Results

Disclaimer: I'm bad at feedback, which is why I rarely post feedback. Here it is anyway. If I'm off-point in any way, feel free to let me know.

BryGuy with Silver Thief/Gold Thief
Clever to trash Silvers/Golds from the Supply to fuel its next play. This card is alright, but Thief cards have been tried many times before. For experienced players, these just add stop cards to your deck and remove stop cards from your opponent, helping them in some cases. Very good for newer players, though. This is about as good as a Thief card as can be made.

Builder_Roberts with Retired Militia
This is quite strong, but suffers from the Sea Hag problem: You don't get anything when you play this (Except when you trash.) Meaning that you want to trash this often to get the effect, which feels bad. The Villagers are a nice consolation, though. Buying lots of these lets you trash a lot of them, which let you play more of them, but the Attack doesn't stack, so you don't want to do that. In a way, this interferes with itself, so you don't want too many of these at the same time in most cases.

AJL828 with Broomstick
One of my favorite cards of the submissions. The discard might make it slightly too weak, but the 13 coin trigger is really unique!

sumrex with The Legend of Night and Day
Should have "from their hand" in the text, in case people play these with Golem or something. A decent card, but a bit convoluted. I understand it, but newer players might not get it.

4est with School of Witchcraft
This one is interesting and hard to judge. You want these for the points, but then again you don't want them because it leads to more Curses. Overall a good card, but I would need to playtest it to know how it plays in reality. It's also begging to have other Attack cards in the Kingdom, but sometimes duds on that. I see that it plays fine without other Attacks, but seriously, you really want those Attacks.

JW with Malevolent Witch
I like this card. Well-balanced. Not much to say about it.

Augie279 with Picket
Seems well-balanced and has some clever self-interaction. I can't find any fault, but there are so many cards and I have to choose only a few winners.

X-tra with Brats
Creative to use a Copper as a penalty card. May be a bit strong compared to Cutpurse, but gaining the Copper to hand option alleviates that. It forces an interesting choice like Torturer does. I like this card as well.

NoMoreFun with Usurper
This attack is brutal. It also might need an FAQ because of the order of discarding thing. This might be balanced, but I sure wouldn't want to play a game with this in the Kingdom.

majiponi with Soldiers Village/Armed Smithy
Soldiers Village isn't really an Attack, but I'll let that slide because it's easily fixable by using some other type. This pair of cards have several clever things going on. I like the pair, but don't love it. No suggestions for improvement, though. I think this is as clever and creative as it needs to be, I just happen to like other cards more.

n_sanity with Burglar
This suffers from the Sea Hag problem in that it doesn't do anything for you, it just hurts your opponents. Seems balanced for 7, but doesn't seem fun.

czzzz with Tree Giant
One of my favorite submissions. Very good card and the theme is well-integrated. My only complaint could be that it might be slow to resolve with multiple opponents, especially if you play multiples.

arowdok with Eternal Struggle
I'm not sure on the balance of the card, but I prefer elegant cards. This one has quite the wall of text. It has 10 lines of text, which is more than Possession has at 8 last time I checked. The replaying every turn is clever, though. I'd like to see a simpler version of this card in the future.

Xen3k with Goblin Village
Lots of hedging/nerfing on this card to make it weak enough for 2. It's a good card, but a bit plain. I'm surprised you were able to fit so many effects in such a small number of words. It does a lot, but a lot of it has been done before. The new thing, that it's a Village/Attack, I've tried before and I could never get it to work correctly. Maybe this one finally does it right.

Erick648 with Almoner
One of my favorite cards of the submissions. My discard pile is seemingly always empty; This puts a Copper into the discard pile for me to grab every time. It limits Copper gains to 3 so that it isn't a rehash of Counting House.

SignError with Faun
Very good card and made in the style of my favorite mechanism: choices.  I can see players playing Faun to gain Fauns early and then trash them later to give Curses. Good synergy, well-balanced.

nagdon with Battle Witch
Elegant and simple. I really like this card. The only downside is that it doesn't do anything new. Not much else to say here.

emtzalex with Dragon
This card is really powerful. I'm sure it's fine when people gain it mid-game, but people are going to be rushing for these. Getting one allows you to quickly get more of them in many cases, shutting a player out if that happens. Cursed Gold and Desperation both make this card an instant win for the lucky player, though.

Ltaco with Rebuke
A bit strong. You can buy unique cards early and ensure that this hits frequently. That can be mitigated, of course, but I still feel that this is too strong for a 2-cost.

J410 with Vizier
Simple and elegant, but I don't like that idea of a -1 Action token. Wow, that really hurts. Even with the nerf this is scary to me. I'm glad you nerfed it, but in games without Villages, this because useless. That makes it highly situational and potentially very powerful, which is a combination that leads to a type of swinginess.

Gubump with Assassin
Simple and elegant. My first thought was that this is too powerful, since a -1 Card for an opponent is roughly similar to +1 card for you, making this a Peddler variant. But then I calmed down and realized that it only works once per turn. Still might be a bit strong for a 2-cost, but I like it.

xyz123 with Consul
This makes for a cool mini-game where you try to guess which card you need to reveal to do the most damage. Choose too good of a card, and there's a chance that they won't have it in hand at the moment. This may be slightly strong, I'd have to play with it to tell.


Honorable Mention (In no particular order): JW with Malevolent Witch, Gubump with Assassin, SignError with Faun, X-tra with Brats

3rd place: Erick648 with Almoner

2nd place: czzzz with Tree Giant

1st place: AJL828 with Broomstick

Thank you for participating!

Builder_Roberts

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 104
  • Respect: +180
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #65 on: December 08, 2022, 12:49:02 pm »
0

Congrats to AJL828!

Builder_Roberts with Retired Militia
This is quite strong, but suffers from the Sea Hag problem: You don't get anything when you play this (Except when you trash.) Meaning that you want to trash this often to get the effect, which feels bad. The Villagers are a nice consolation, though. Buying lots of these lets you trash a lot of them, which let you play more of them, but the Attack doesn't stack, so you don't want to do that. In a way, this interferes with itself, so you don't want too many of these at the same time in most cases.

I thought the Sea Hag problem was specifically because it did stack with itself. I understand you probably meant that it only Attacks, but you really can't say that it does. Having to trash Retired Militia when you play it just means that it gets out of your deck faster. Yeah, you don't want too many of these in most cases, but in most cases there's also a village on the board. It has it's niche, is all I'm saying.
« Last Edit: December 08, 2022, 12:50:21 pm by Builder_Roberts »
Logged
Just living a life, you know?
All of the Best cards I've made:http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=21287.0

AJL828

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 142
  • Shuffle iT Username: AJL828
  • Respect: +394
    • View Profile
Re: Weekly Design Contest #170: 2/7 Offsuit
« Reply #66 on: December 09, 2022, 12:38:17 am »
+2

Thank you for the win, this was an interesting prompt and there were a lot of cool submissions!

I just posted the next contest as well!
Logged
Did you hear about the skyscraper with one really tall floor? I could tell you but it’s a long story…
Pages: 1 2 [3]  All
 

Page created in 0.088 seconds with 22 queries.