Print

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

[Aquila]

Resources, like Ruins but useful. For mock-ups, see 2 posts down.

Fruit - Action Resource, cost.
You may play an Action card costing more than this from your hand. Then, +2 Cards.

Fur - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Card
+2 Actions

Ore - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Action
+

Wood - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
-
When you gain or trash this, +1 Buy and +.

These are an added pile of buyable cards, 10 of each in a pile of 40, shuffled together at game start and put face down with the top one turned over.
They are included whenever a card refers to Resources, not with a type, just like Loot.
Unlike any other pile, when you buy a Resource, you may first rotate the pile before gaining one. (If an effect gains a Resource, you have to gain the top one).

I think that's it for rules. In terms of design, they're made to not work very well together. A deck of purely Resources would be boring if it worked.

I will say no more and let you decide how this mechanic may be best used. I have toyed with it a fair bit, making an expansion around it (Wilderness; the Wilderness thread isn't up to date.)
Contest closes February 26th 4:00pm forum time.

Edit: Resources changed from these variants:

Fruit - Action Resource, cost.
You may play an Action card costing more than this from your hand. Then, +2 Cards.

Fur - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Card
+2 Actions
Discard a card.

Ore - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Action
+

Wood - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy

[segura]

Fruit > Ore > Wood > Fur.

Don’t you think that the huge difference between something that is only moderately worse than a Lab and something that is significantly worse than Hamlet is problematic in a random pile?

[Aquila]

Too true, this. I've settled into using these Resources for a while now, but there's no getting around these cold hard facts. It's bothering me! By the nature of their intended randomness it's been hard to actually focus on their individual power level in testing while testing out the cards that use them.

With Fur, well, there's proof I don't have Hamlet! I imagined it as always +2 Actions may discard for +Card, but checking it now Fur does look silly.
With Fruit, I was going with the need to have a non-Resource Action in hand before the draw cheapening it from Lab enough, just as Old Map can cost whereas Fugitive is $4.5. I can easily believe it being too good at .

How do these variants look:

Fruit - Action Resource, cost.
[same]

Fur - Action Resource, cost
+1 Card
+2 Actions

Ore - Action Resource, cost.
[same]

Wood - Action Resource, cost.
+1 Card
+1 Action
+1 Buy
-
When you gain or trash this, +1 Buy and + .

Fruit now can't play Actions. Fur can be plain Village (maybe a bit boring). Ore can equal Silver (do you actually go for it? The Ducat - Candlestick Maker debate). Wood gets a when-gain and when-trash to bring it up to ; you aren't so sad if you have to get an excess of them.
The boringness should be made up by the cards that add them to the game, which you are designing.

If I don't hear any other negative feedback by Monday 4:00am forum time, I will update the Resources to these. I should probably bring the close date to then as well, to make up for this time.

[segura]

I like these changes, they are more close in power level now.

[segura]

Harvester
$3 - Action
Trash a card from your hand to gain a Resource onto your deck.

A simple Remodel/Develop variant with topdecking added as it would be weaker than either of those cards otherwise. Well, not really as you cannot Remodel or Develop a Copper into a $3 but I nonetheless think that the buff is necessary.

I also considered hand-gaining but had a hard time to gauge the power level, as e.g. early on it could be weaker than the topdecking version.

[czzzz]

Edit: I don't know what I was thinking with + per Resource on a -cost. Updated.

[emtzalex]

My Submission:

Stone Soup • Action • $4 +3 Cards If you have no Resources in play, discard 2 cards. Otherwise, +1 Buy.

My submission is Stone Soup. It's quite simple, and doesn't provide a means for gaining Resources, players just have to buy them (or gain them using a gainer). Instead, if you've played a Resource it's a Smithy with an extra +Buy, and if you haven't it's a Ruined Library with some sifting.

The name comes from the old folktale, which is about people sharing the resources they have. Thus, as long as there are some Resources available (i.e. in play), Stone Soup works and generates a nice benefit. If there aren't any, not so much. And, yes, I submitted a completely different card by the same name in the Dominion: Soup thread.

[BryGuy]

Interesting that no resource allows you to trash - is this on purpose?

My Submission:

Resource Trader
$4 Action
You may rotate the Resources. You may trash a card from your hand, if it ... costs $0, you may gain a Resource; or is a Resource, you may review the top three Resources, placing one under its pile and gain the other two.

[BryGuy]

Ore seams like a worse version of Silver since it could be drawn dead. Would you consider a trasher instead? This could be Night instead of or addition to Action. How about:

Ore
$3 Action - Resource
You may trash a card from your hand, if it is a Treasure, +1 Coffer; otherwise, +1 Villager.

[BryGuy]

I find it interesting that you removed the discarding from Fur. I think i would have gone another direction - maybe something like:

Fur
$3 Action - Resource
+1 Card, +1 Action; Discard an Action for +1 Card and +1 Action or reveal a hand with no Action cards to discard a Non-Victory for +1 Action.

[segura]

I find it interesting that you removed the discarding from Fur. I think i would have gone another direction - maybe something like:

Fur
$3 Action - Resource
+1 Card, +1 Action; Discard an Action for +1 Card and +1 Action or reveal a hand with no Action cards to discard a Non-Victory for +1 Action.

That looks even worse than the first version which was inferior to Hamlet which again was an issue in a random pile with a $4.5 power level Lab variant.

[Aquila]

Interesting that no resource allows you to trash - is this on purpose?

I did have a trashing Resource to start with, in addition to the other 4, to mirror Survivors in Ruins. The trouble with it was, if it showed up late game and players had already thinned down, it was a junk card, a sad situation. All the other Resources are consistently good throughout the game, and adding a trasher would work against some of their possibilities.

Ore seams like a worse version of Silver since it could be drawn dead.

There are cards that prefer Ore; this forum has discussed Ducat and Candlestick Maker quite deeply. That said, I almost kept Ore at , but didn't in case of two players opening / and only the first one getting an Ore. It's a rare case, so it may still be good to do?

I find it interesting that you removed the discarding from Fur. I think i would have gone another direction - maybe something like:

Fur
$3 Action - Resource
+1 Card, +1 Action; Discard an Action for +1 Card and +1 Action or reveal a hand with no Action cards to discard a Non-Victory for +1 Action.

Simplicity is the reason I did it. 4 different cards added to the game with the word 'Resource' on a card can be hard for some players to remember, especially together with some potential effects with that word 'Resource'.
Discarding a card did help make the pile worse by itself, and that's still a potential snag. The kingdom piles must create the best strategy, and Resources assist.

[Xen3k]

Dogsled - $3
Action - Reaction
+2 Cards
You may play a Resource from your hand.
----
When any player gains a card with 2 or more types, you may discard this, to gain a Resource to your hand.

[Aquila]

24 hours remain

[Aquila]

Contest closed now, but it's late here and I will need to put my judgments to bed before posting them here tomorrow. There are 5 entries, if I'm not mistaken.

[Aquila]

I will start with the entries, then give further thoughts on the mechanic afterwards.

segura	Harvester Action, cost. Trash a card from your hand to gain a Resource onto your deck.	Remodel that upgrades junk into Resources for next draw. +: Consistent engine building with the components coming in random order. The variation created with each player's deck is nice early game, and imbalance could be amended later. Going onto deck means ever-changing plans for the next draw. -: hard to find a negative that isn't attached to the Resource mechanic itself. Overview: a safe design that's casually pleasing. It has disadvantages over other trash-junk-for-benefit cards in unreliability, but it can sometimes build an engine better.
czzzz		Village that particularly likes playing Resources and can gain them. +: optionally gaining a Resource lets unwanted ones be skipped. It doesn’t add too much to help a pure Resource deck. -: the impetus to gain and play a lot of Resources doesn’t feel great. A Village often wants to play stronger cards; to get the + the deck’s potential power density has to be diluted a bit. Overview: it’s a Village that can contribute other important engine pieces to the deck, but is made less meaningful by the ability to buy those pieces, including Fur. It's there if no other Village exists and not enough Fur shows up, which isn't bad, but only mildly interesting.
emtzalex		Terminal draw that needs to line up with Resources. +: Some Resources are more favourable than others, Fur especially, making their differences relevant. -: the way this uses Resources isn’t that interesting, extra things to play first as well as Villages. Overview: a large part of the deck's makeup is defined if it uses this, several Resources to increase the chance of playing one first  and copies of these for its main draw. The variation in number of each Resource does help it be more replayable, but games with it may overall end up feeling very similar. This doesn’t stand out much over other terminal draw, so if Smithy is in the same game, it will be the preference for reliability; Wood can give the +Buys.
BryGuy	Resource Trader Action, cost. You may rotate the Resources. You may trash a card from your hand. If it costs , gain a Resource. If it's a Resource, look at the top 3 Resources of the Resource pile, choose one to put back under the pile, and gain the other two.	Trasher that upgrades $0s into Resources and undesirable Resources into desirable ones. +: like Harvester, turning Copper into Resources is pleasant opening engine support. -: when a Resource is trashed, it may leave a worse outcome. The rotating and the choice of 3 effect feel like unnecessary complexity together, and one could go. Overview: it incorporates the simple appeal of Harvester, only Estates can't be turned into Resources. The other abilities mean the variety of Resources is about digging for the right ones. This is fine when the game gives a definite importance to one or more of them, but then a bit sad when it doesn't quite work out. I might prefer a different Resource trash bonus.
Xen3k		+2 Cards Reaction dog that acquires and builds a deck with Resources. +: A reaction that gains Resources to hand is a nice principle, improving the hand or denying one to opponents at precise moments. Fruit, often the strongest Resource, is likely the weakest with this. -: the on-play effect looks strong for a , seeing that 3 of the 4 Resources are always non-terminal. Sometimes the Reaction can’t get a needed Resource because the top is too useful. Testing may prove these to be small issues. Overview: as the deck’s principal draw this will do similarly to Stone Soup, making up a large part of the deck and feeling repetitive long term; but this doesn’t depend on Resources to draw, so it isn’t as scripted and a deck could run with other sources of draw alongside this. The use of Resources here is about fixing the power level of the cards gained and played, which is OK. Overall it feels like Rope, in that it will help any engine deck but not win by itself; but because it draws quite well it may still contribute a bit too much for a single kingdom pile?

In terms of the most interesting way to use Resources, I will choose...

Runner-up: Dogsled by Xen3k

Winner: Harvester by segura

It's interesting how all of these entries were about gaining and building a deck partly out of Resources. Because that can always be done anyway, I felt a bit lukewarm about most of them. Resources don't trash, and that together with using the variety for extra interest I guess is why Harvester excited me the most.

I did think about changing the rotate rule to make it a bit kinder: once per turn, at the start of your Buy phase, you may rotate the Resources. You don't have to commit a Buy on it first, but possibly finding the right ones becomes a bit too easy?

I may update the Wilderness thread soon, and that will show how I like using the mechanic. This contest has helped me make improvements, and I'm grateful for that.

segura may take the reins if they so wish.

[segura]

Thanks for the win, I did not expect it and thought that there were more complex and thoughtful designs like e.g Dogsled.