Print

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

[eHalcyon]

The attack would have to be pretty weak or else it might end up comboing too well with Torturer, Rabble and Margrave (or even Ghost Ship and Witch) to make engines. It will be incredibly easy to chain the attack village itself, so they can't chain too well.
Hell, maybe the "attack" could actually be helpful. I like it when I have a moat in hand but I don't reveal it because I can get something out of the attack (such as discarding tunnels off a militia), or when attacks end up "backfiring" (like swindling a peddler into a province because the peddler pile was empty). Something like:


Poorhouse
Cost: 4
+2 Actions
+1 Coin
Each other player discards a card and gains a copper, putting it into his hand

Or even get rid of the discard and make it cheaper. The complete opposite of stacking.

I like this.  Suggestion: instead of +1 coin, have "You may gain a Copper in hand."  And maybe have the attack part linked to that: "If you do, each other player discards a card and gains a copper in hand."

[ospanky]

Has anyone already mentioned the idea of ruin being a kinda negative duke?

Something like worth -1 VP for every province/victory card you have in your deck?

[werothegreat]

I'd like to bet 10 dominion dollars that Shelters, Ruins or both will be part of the first 3 cards revealed in the previews.

[meow]

I predict (or maybe would just like to see?) something like:
Junk Dealer - Reaction
When an opponent trashes a card, you may reveal this and gain a silver (or a card costing up to X)

[Davio]

Yes, but that card would be useless in a game without trashers.

That's the problem every trash-reaction has, it needs to trash on its own.

[brokoli]

That's the problem every trash-reaction has, it needs to trash on its own.

... Or it needs to have another effect. Moat is not totally useless in games without attacks.

[werothegreat]

Yes, but that card would be useless in a game without trashers.

That's the problem every trash-reaction has, it needs to trash on its own.

Charlatan - Action-Attack-Reaction
Trash a card.  If you do, each other player gains a Curse.
---
When another player trashes a card, you may reveal this card.  If you do, gain a Silver.

[brokoli]

Funny, "Charlatan" is the french name for mountebank.

[werothegreat]

Funny, "Charlatan" is the french name for mountebank.

Maybe they'll call this one "Montebanque."

[Beyond Awesome]

I think Shelters will be a O VP Reaction card that prevents curses from going into your deck, and I think Ruins will be  a sort of curse but also worth 0 VP, but maybe you can pay money to trash them but not be able to trash them normally like with Chapel and such. Also, I think that there will be no 6 cost or higher cards in this set. I predict it is designed for long and strategic game play.

[philosophyguy]

One of the interesting questions I have is: what trash for benefit cards in the currently released sets will have the greatest change in value (either positive or negative) with the introduction of Dark Ages? Just like Hinterlands made us all reevaluate Silver gainers like Bureaucrat and Explorer, I expect that Dark Ages will force us to find a new strategic depth to TFB. Will Remodel suddenly shine in new situations? Will Salvager become a powerhouse? Will Apprentice engines no longer look as enticing?

[ftl]

I suspect that the power of various TFB cards may be either buffed or nerfed depending on the set. Like, depending on what's available, you either don't want to put any cards in the trash (for your opponent to use somehow) or you want to combo a TFB card with something that counts the trash yourself.

I suspect Apprentice will be buffed, since it's nonterminal, so if there's an action card that cares about the trash, you can play apprentice and then the trash-caring action. Same for Upgrade, I suspect.

How the terminal TFB cards will play will depend on whether the Dark Ages cards they match up with are terminal or nonterminal, and how many of each you need to get value out of them (is it worth building an engine just to make the combo work?)

Just speculation, of course.

[AdamH]

I had a thought. What if Ruins were a treasure card worth -1 that you were required to play? I realize that exact thing won't work because the rule isn't possible to enforce, but is there something similar that affects your money?

[Tables]

Let's see if I can word this right. Obviously this isn't how it IS or even SHOULD be implemented. But it's how such a card COULD be.

Ruins
Treasure-Reaction -$0
-$1
When you discard this, set it aside
--
When you have no cards left on your deck, you may reveal any number of Ruins cards simultaneously.
---
When you have no cards left on your deck and are not looking at or revealing a card, if the number revealed plus the number of set aside Ruins is less than the number of Ruin tokens you have, you immediately lose the game.
---
When you trash this card, remove one Ruin token
---
When you gain this card, gain a Ruin token.

Yay for overcomplicating a simple idea! Also I'm sure there are edge cases where this STILL doesn't entirely work. But in short, I don't think there's a simple way to force a -$1 to be used while keeping people honest.

[Thisisnotasmile]

Giving it a distinct back like Stash would work, not that I encourage variants discussion in the general board.

[Tables]

It would, but it also makes it impossible to shuffle entirely fairly.

[werothegreat]

It would, but it also makes it impossible to shuffle entirely fairly.

Maybe Ruins will have the rule that if you have Ruins in your deck, your opponent shuffles for you.

[eHalcyon]

It would, but it also makes it impossible to shuffle entirely fairly.

Maybe Ruins will have the rule that if you have Ruins in your deck, your opponent shuffles for you.

Same issue applies.

[werothegreat]

It would, but it also makes it impossible to shuffle entirely fairly.

Maybe Ruins will have the rule that if you have Ruins in your deck, your opponent shuffles for you.

Same issue applies.

It would foster a desire to not have Ruins in your deck.  They're supposed to be bad.

[ftl]

If it has a unique back, then the rules pretty much have to say that after shuffling, you (or your opponent) get to put them anywhere in your deck.

[ftl]

So that seems entirely unlikely to me.

[WheresMyElephant]

Just like Hinterlands made us all reevaluate Silver gainers like Bureaucrat and Explorer

I've heard this before but what's the argument for it? I mean, I can see Hinterlands gave us some strong Silver gainers, but how does it strengthen the existing ones? Just in the sense that Explorer is a good late addition to a Jack deck? I guess you can Farmland Silvers to Duchies which is nice? That's about it, I'm stumped.
 

Maybe Ruins will have the rule that if you have Ruins in your deck, your opponent shuffles for you.

This sounds like it would slow the game down horribly. Shuffling takes long enough already, but at least a lot of it is done while your opponent takes his turn.

[theory]

Just like Hinterlands made us all reevaluate Silver gainers like Bureaucrat and Explorer

I've heard this before but what's the argument for it? I mean, I can see Hinterlands gave us some strong Silver gainers, but how does it strengthen the existing ones? Just in the sense that Explorer is a good late addition to a Jack deck? I guess you can Farmland Silvers to Duchies which is nice? That's about it, I'm stumped.

I think when people realized Jack was so strong, they were like, hey, maybe gaining Silver ain't that bad after all.

[werothegreat]

Just like Hinterlands made us all reevaluate Silver gainers like Bureaucrat and Explorer

I've heard this before but what's the argument for it? I mean, I can see Hinterlands gave us some strong Silver gainers, but how does it strengthen the existing ones? Just in the sense that Explorer is a good late addition to a Jack deck? I guess you can Farmland Silvers to Duchies which is nice? That's about it, I'm stumped.

I think when people realized Jack was so strong, they were like, hey, maybe gaining Silver ain't that bad after all.

I love how, both as individual players and as the Dominion community as a whole, we oscillate back and forth on how strong certain cards are.  Chapel is stupid, Chapel is AWESOME, Chapel is meh, Chapel is sweet... Silver is ok, Silver is AWESOME, Silver is stupid, Silver's not bad...  Chancellor is dumb, Chancellor is meh, Chancellor is terrible, Chancellor makes a couple killer combos but is still terrible...

[Kirian]

Chancellor is dumb, Chancellor is meh, Chancellor is terrible, Chancellor makes a couple killer combos but is still terrible...

That's not much of an oscillation...