Print

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

[rinkworks]

This will probably be one of the hardest challenges in this series, but I'm sure we're all up to it.

--

Submission Rules

* Submit no more than one card per person per challenge.  You do not need to submit for all challenges if you don't want to, but of course you can't win if you don't compete.
* Submit your cards to me via this forum's messaging system.  Submissions made after each week's deadline cannot be accepted.
* Each card you submit must have a name, a cost, a list of types, and the exact wording that should appear on the card.  Also include a brief description of any special design considerations (e.g., Stash having a unique back), but do NOT include any other information, such as strategic commentary or examples about it would play.
* Although you must submit names for each of your cards, the names will not be listed on the voting ballots, so make sure your card's appeal does not depend on your choice of name.
* I will accept revisions to your contest entries provided they are submitted to me before the deadline.  If you submit a revision to an entry you have previously submitted to me, resubmit your revised card(s) in their entirety.  That is, don't tell me "Oh, can you make that +2 Cards say +3 Cards instead?"  Just resubmit the full card.
* Only submit cards that are your own design.
* You may submit cards that have been previously posted here in this forum, including those that have been refined by the community as a whole, provided you can still claim that the central conceit of the card -- and the majority of its final version -- is yours.  This applies to cards previously posted, however -- if your submissions aren't already posted on his board, please refrain from doing so until after the results have been announced.
* A single card might conceivably qualify for multiple challenges within this series.  However, you may not submit the same card for more than one challenge.
* Do not disclose your submissions publicly, either in this thread or elsewhere

--

The deadline for this week's challenges is Monday, July 30, at 10am EDT.

--

Challenge #8 - Non-Attack Interaction

Objective: Design a card that is not an Attack card but that, when played by one player, allows or requires at least one other player to act.  The card may not be "targeted" in the sense that it allows the player to choose which opponent(s) are affected.

Official Examples: Cards that only affect the player to the left:  Tribute, Envoy, Contraband, Possession.  Cards that affect all other players:  Council Room, Masquerade, Bishop, Vault, Tournament, Governor, Duchess.

Official Non-Examples: All Attack cards, because they are Attack cards.  Smugglers, because it allows you to do something based on what another player did, rather than allowing other players to act at the time you play it.  All the official Reaction cards, for the same reason.  Embassy and Ill-Gotten Gains, because they only allow other players to act when someone buys it rather than when someone plays it.   City and Trade Route, because although those cards can affect other players, they don't allow other players to act when played.

--

The Ballot
The Results

[popsofctown]

Your post implies that IGG would qualify if it was on play, not on gain, I presume because the curse would trigger Trader and Watchtower.  Does that mean Tribute qualifies because it can trigger Tunnel?

[rinkworks]

Your post implies that IGG would qualify if it was on play, not on gain, I presume because the curse would trigger Trader and Watchtower.  Does that mean Tribute qualifies because it can trigger Tunnel?

Embassy and Ill-Gotten Gains would only qualify because other players would have to gain something, not because they might trigger a Reaction card in some way.  If a Reaction card does get triggered, it's really the Reaction card that's the active  agent there, while whatever triggered it is merely a catalyst.  But if a non-Attack card causes other players to gain something on play (as is the case with Governor's Gold/Silver option), that counts.

(Of course, in the case of Ill-Gotten Gains, moving the Cursing effect from on-gain to on-play would probably necessitate it having an "Attack" type, which would disqualify it on those grounds.)

[Grujah]

Smugglers don't qualify I guess?

[rinkworks]

Smugglers don't qualify I guess?

No, but it's worth adding to the list of non-qualifying cards and explaining why.  Good catch.

[WanderingWinder]

I'm a little confused. Gaining cards counts as 'acting'? So all the cursers would qualify if you took the attack type off? (which of course, you wouldn't want to do). So, but then, what cards is this going to work for? Like, if I force you to gain a curse, that ought to be an attack. If I force you to gain a province, it need not be. Smugglers doesn't count, because you are the one gaining. What about an anti-smugglers that makes the opponent gain something I have gained or I will gain? Or something that gains us the same card somehow? Is this an attack, or not? You could sort of use it as a curser, depending on how you word it?

Also, tribute counts? Their mere having to flip cards off their deck is acting? I mean, there is definite interaction in how we sculpt our decks, if a tribute-like card is available, and I get stuff based on what you have done, but that doesn't seem to play differently from smugglers, in the interaction sense. I guess it's a little vague to me, particularly what gets rejected based on these grounds, just out of hand, and what gets tossed to the voters. Like, if I submit witch, without the attack type, are you going to reject that, or is it down to the voters to say 'gee, that really ought to be an attack'. Because this is a really interesting challenge to me, but I am not quite sure where the boundaries lie.

Also, just throwin' it out there - tribute encourages mirrors; I would love to see a card that encourages diverging strategies...

[Powerman]

So the card has to be played differently because your opponents are there?  So a card like this would "qualify":

Tough Love
$2
The player to your left chooses.  You gain any number of provinces; or you gain any number of golds and +10 Buys.

[rinkworks]

I'm a little confused. Gaining cards counts as 'acting'? So all the cursers would qualify if you took the attack type off? . . . Like, if I submit witch, without the attack type, are you going to reject that, or is it down to the voters to say 'gee, that really ought to be an attack'.

I'd accept it and would leave it up to the voters to weed out things like that.

Also, tribute counts? Their mere having to flip cards off their deck is acting? . . . but that doesn't seem to play differently from smugglers, in the interaction sense. . . . this is a really interesting challenge to me, but I am not quite sure where the boundaries lie.

Tribute counts, and you're right that it's probably not less interactive than Smugglers.  But I had to pin down in the clearest terms possible what would count and what wouldn't, and the simplest way to do that was to only look at on-play behavior.  So Smugglers becomes ineligible not because it doesn't achieve the level of interaction I'm interested in but because the clearest rules I could come up with to zero in on that level of interaction happens to exclude Smugglers anyhow.  Or you can look at it the other way:  Tribute might NOT achieve the level of interaction I'm looking for, but the clearest rules I could come up with had to include it.

The bottom line is it's a lot easier to distinguish between opponents "acting" and not acting, than it is to distinguish between opponents "receiving a benefit" or not.  I mean, Council Room might cause an opponent an unwanted reshuffle, while Tribute might skip a pair of green cards, so who am I to decide what's a benefit and what isn't?  There's too much gray area.

It might help if I back up a step and tell you why I wanted to pose this particular challenge.  In a nutshell, it's because I enjoy interaction -- but in Dominion you get a lot of games where all players are doing things relatively independently of each other, and the game is a simple race to see who can cross the finish line first.  Ok, so actually it's rarely "simple," but you get what I mean:  players act roughly independent of each other until the game ends.  It's a testament to how great a game Dominion is that that kind of game can be screamingly fun.  But it is often even more fun in games where that independence is broken.

Attack cards are the most common way this happens.  Every Dominion set has a few attacks in it, and that ensures that many if not most games have at least that much interactivity happening.  This set will be no exception:  we've already got a Curser, and there may be other attack cards around the corner as well.

But some of my favorite cards are the ones that benefit opponents (Bishop, Council Room, Vault) or at least require them to be awake and alert during their turn (Tribute, Envoy).  One of the best live games I ever played was the kingdom where we purposely chose all of these type of cards -- pretty much the whole list of eligible cards listed in the original post.  There was no waiting for the other player to take his turn.  All players were active all the time.  Moreover, the strategy space was considerably wider than it is in many Dominion games, because no matter what you bought, you had to consider how it would affect your opponents, or at the very least (as with Tribute and Possession) how their strategies would affect you.

That's the design space I was trying to zero in on.  Doesn't mean the submissions have to be in that kind of spirit, or that people have to vote with my goals in mind, though!  I've distilled my intentions into the simplest, clearest words I can, and now all that counts is the letter of those rules.

I'm sure there will be cards that come along that challenge me to make a difficult decision about eligibility.  I'll be permissive about edge cases, as I have so far, and let people know if they submit a card I have to rule ineligible, so they can submit something else instead.

[Polk5440]

But some of my favorite cards are the ones that benefit opponents (Bishop, Council Room, Vault) or at least require them to be awake and alert during their turn (Tribute, Envoy).

I am right there with you!

[Morgrim7]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

[zahlman]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

As usual, it's up to the community to vote on them.

[Morgrim7]

What will you be judging by? Creativity?

As usual, it's up to the community to vote on them.

What will the community judge on?

[zahlman]

That's for everyone to think they know, and everyone to find out.

[NoMoreFun]

Cards like Trade Route and City don't count, right?

[rinkworks]

Cards like Trade Route and City don't count, right?

Right, although if I don't get tired of running these before I get the various challenges done that I want to, maybe a separate contest for a card like this would be a good idea.

[eHalcyon]

Does each play of the card have to have interaction, or can it be part of a choice?  For example, Pirate Ship doesn't interact (beyond reactions) when you choose +$.  From the current rules, it sounds like that wouldn't be allowed.

[rinkworks]

Does each play of the card have to have interaction, or can it be part of a choice?  For example, Pirate Ship doesn't interact (beyond reactions) when you choose +$.  From the current rules, it sounds like that wouldn't be allowed.

I think I have to rule on the stricter side of this one, ruling out cards where the player decides whether or not to choose an option that allows interaction.  So Governor only qualifies because all three choices allow the opponents to act.  But it's worth pointing out two related things that ARE allowed:

(1) It's okay if the opponent gets to decide whether to act or not.  (Vault, Bishop)
(2) It's okay if the opponent can't act due to some required circumstance out of the original player's control.  (Tournament, in the case where no opponent has a Province to reveal; Tribute, in the case where the left opponent has no cards to draw.)

[rinkworks]

I have an amusing story to tell regarding the design of an "opponent gets a benefit" card.  My brother had an idea for a card where all players get some amount of filtering capability, but the player gets more.  We went back and forth on how many cards each player would get to rotate in or out, and we changed our minds a couple times about whether or not the opponents would get a Warehouse-style "draw, then discard" or a Cellar-style "discard, then draw."  Ultimately we came up with the following:

Tavern
$3 or $4 - Action
+2 Cards
+1 Action
Discard a card.
Each other player draws a card and discards a card.

Spotted the problem yet?  Seeing it written out like that, we might have noticed.  But we were just trading ideas back and forth, finally came to a verbal agreement on what we'd test, and then played through a couple games.  In one game, my brother bought the majority of them, so he got a feel for the player's benefit and I got a feel for the opponent's benefit.  The opponent's benefit seemed super strong, much more than you might think.  In the second game, I experienced more of the player's side, and I was thinking, well, okay, that's pretty strong too.  So maybe this card will be fine!

But as we talked out our experiences with the card, only then did we realize the design flaw.  It is, namely, that if you remove the "cantrip" portion of the player's benefit -- the +1 Card and +1 Action that replace itself in your hand and restore the Action you spent on it -- the player and opponent benefits are identical.   You would therefore never want to buy it, since you'd be burning cash and a buy on a card that kept the scales even.

So we were amused.   We figured next time we'd test a corrected version, like "+3 Cards, discard 2" for the player and maybe more of a Cellar-style benefit for the opponent instead of a Warehouse-style benefit.  Or whatever.  The moral of the story:  sometimes even playtesting results (especially with a limited number of games) don't tell you everything you need to know.

[popsofctown]

You wouldn't never want to buy it, you just very rarely would want a symmetric effect like that. 

[rinkworks]

You wouldn't never want to buy it, you just very rarely would want a symmetric effect like that.

I didn't mean "never" literally, but I think I'm roughly comfortable making it literal for me.  I get what you mean, though:  in one of our test games, my brother made a heavily-trashed, slim, power engine deck, while I skipped trashing in favor of filtering effects.  In that instance, our new card was much more beneficial to me on average, as I tended to have junk to skip over, and he didn't.

On the other hand, that window of divergent utility vanished quickly, because when he started greening, the green cards choked him up a lot more than me, as each green card diluted a higher percentage of his deck.  It wasn't long before our card stopped being an advantage to me and possibly even became a hindrance.  That being the case -- the card not being enough of an advantage over a simple Silver even with such unusually divergent decks -- I can't conceive of me ever wanting to buy the card.  I suppose if I'd been running Conspirators too, while my opponent abstained from them, that might have been enough to tip the scales.  But it would be just about the most narrow card ever.

[popsofctown]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

[qmech]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

Hopefully the plane's to somewhere really remote, like Norfolk.

[zahlman]

I'd put it on the same plane as Scout.

Hopefully the plane's to somewhere really remote, like Norfolk.

Well, of course you send the Scout to the remote regions first. Gotta check if it's safe for everyone else!

[popsofctown]

Like a Norfolk Estate

[rinkworks]

Here is the ballot for Challenge #8!

--

Voting Rules:

Each person may cast votes as follows:  For each Challenge, you may fill your ballot out in one of two ways:

(1) Award 3 points to one entry.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.
(2) Award 2 points to each of two entries.  Award 1 point to any number of other entries.

Submit your votes via PM to me by Monday, August 6, 2012, 10am EDT in the following format:

Challenge 1

3 CardName
1 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName
1 AnotherCardNameGoesHereToo

Challenge 2

2 CardName
2 AnotherCardName
1 StillAnotherCardName

Please use the above format!  One card per line, with the number of votes given before it, and no extra punctuation or anything.  This will make it easy for me to copy-and-paste your votes into the format my vote-counting script needs it to be in.

Do not submit votes for your own cards.  (If you do, my script will catch you anyway.)

By submitting vote(s) for a challenge, you will automatically earn 1 point for your entry in that challenge.  This is to incentivize contestants to submit votes.  (My script does this automatically, so don't worry that I'll forget to do this.)

Note that the supplied card names are for discussion/identification only -- they are not the card names that were submitted to me.  The proper card names will be revealed when the results are announced.  Whenever card text says "[This Card]" it means the submitted text says the card's own name there.

Inclusion on the ballot means that the card was deemed eligible for the contest.  You therefore do not need to consider eligibility when voting.  In some cases, this may mean a pretty loose interpretation of the eligibility requirements.  I tried to be fair but also forgiving when a submission came in that twisted the rules in a way I hadn't foreseen.

As a voter, you may use whatever criteria you wish in determining what your votes will be.  Be as forgiving or particular as you like concerning conformance to standard Dominion terminology.   For all winning cards, there will be a chance to tweak the wording as a community, if necessary, before they are canonized.

--

Apple
$5 - Action
+$1
Trash a card from your hand.
Draw up to 5 cards in hand.
Each other player may put a card from their hand on top of their deck.


Orange
$4 - Action
+2 Cards
Name a card. Each other player reveals the bottom card of his deck. If the named card is revealed, +1 Action, +$1.
--
(Rules clarification: After the reveal, the card is returned to the bottom of his deck.)


Strawberry
$5 - Action
+3 Cards
Reveal your hand and trash two Copper cards. If you do, gain a Silver, putting it into your hand. Each other player may trash a Copper from their hand or gain a Copper, putting it into their hand.


Pear
$5 - Action
The player to your left chooses one for you to receive:
+$4, +1 Buy
+2 Cards, +1 Action
+2 VPs


Banana
$3 - Action
Trash this card.
Gain a card costing up to $6, placing it on top of your deck.
Each other player may gain a copy of the card you gained.


Plum
$5 - Action
+2 VP
Discard down to 2 cards in hand. Gain a Silver, putting it in hand.
Each other player may trash up to two cards in hand.


Apricot
$4 - Action
+1 Action
Discard any number of cards from your hand. Draw until you have 5 cards in hand.
Each other player with at least 5 cards may discard his hand and then draw 5 cards.


Grapefruit
$3 - Action
+$2
You may trash all the cards in the [This Card] mat.
Each player (including you) chooses one: put a card from his hand into the [This Card] mat; or gain a card from the [This Card] mat and put it into his hand
--
(Rules clarification: All cards on the [This Card] mat are visible to all players at all times.  There is a single communal [This Card] mat, rather than individual ones.)


Honeydew
$6 - Action
+2 Cards
You may trash 3 random cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Province, putting it on top of your deck.
Every other player may trash two random cards from their hand. If they do, they gain a [This Card], Duchy, or Gold of their choice.


Blueberry
$5 - Action
+$4
While this is in play, Victory cards cost +$1 and each other player gains a copy of the first non-Victory card you buy during your Buy step.


Fig
$2 - Action
+1 Action
Each player puts a Victory token on a non-empty Supply pile.
You may trash a card from your hand. If you do, +1 VP per Victory token on that card's pile and remove those tokens from that pile.


Grape
$3 - Action
Each player may trash up to 2 cards from his hand. +$1 per 2 cards trashed in total, rounded down.


Raspberry
$2 - Action
+1 Card
+$1
Each other player may trash a Treasure from his hand. You gain all of these trashed cards; put them into your hand. If no player trashes a treasure this way, +$1.


Cantaloupe
$3 - Action
Choose one: +2 Cards; or +$2; or the player to your left chooses +3 Cards or +$3.
Each player (including you) may trash a card from their hand.  If no one does, each player gains a Silver, placing it on top of their deck.


Peach
$3 - Action
Trash a card. Gain a card costing up to twice the cost of the trashed card.
Each opponent may gain a card costing up to the cost of the trashed card.


Clementine
$5 - Action
+5 Cards
+1 Action
Reveal your hand.  The player to your left chooses a card to discard from your hand, then the player to your right does the same.


Boysenberry
$5 - Action
Draw one fewer card than last turn during Cleanup this turn.  Take an extra turn after this one.  During that: Players see all you see.  If you may play a card, do so.  If you may buy or gain a card, do so, selecting one with the highest cost in coins.  The player to your left makes all decisions for you.


Tamarind
$3 - Action
+1 Buy
+$1
You may discard 2 cards from your hand. If you do, gain a Treasure costing up to $3, putting it into your hand.
Each other player may discard a card. Each player who does gains a Silver.


Lemon
$3 - Action
Name an Action card. The player to your left either reveals the named card, or reveals a hand with no such card. If he revealed the named card, you play it. At the start of Clean-up, return the card to the player's hand. If he did not reveal the card you named, you get +1 Card, +1 Action, and gain a Curse.


Lime
$5 - Action
Choose 1: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.
The player to your left chooses 1 for you to receive: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +2 Coins; +1 Buy and +1 VP.


Pomegranate
$2 - Action
+1 Action
+$1
Each other player may discard his hand and draw four cards. If any do, you do too.


Guava
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each player (including you) may trash a card from his hand, then draw a card if he does.
If any other player trashes a card this way, +1 Card.


Cherry
$4 - Action
+1 Card
+1 Action
Each other player may reveal a copy of [This Card] from his hand. If no one does, +$2.


Tangerine
$3 - Action
Choose to draw between 2 and 5 cards.  Discard from your hand 2 less cards than you drew.  Your opponents draw and discard a number of cards equal to what you discarded.


Blackberry
$4 - Action
The player to your left names two cards (the two cards are allowed to be the same). Reveal the top 5 cards in your deck, and pick one: put all instances of cards the player to your left named into your hand, or put all cards that the player to your left did not name into your hand. Discard the rest.


Watermelon
$5 - Action
+2 Cards
+$3
+1 Buy
When you play this card, each other player may exchange a card costing more than $2 from their hand for a copy of a card that you have played this turn, including this one. You may either gain the exchanged cards or trash them.


Date
$2P - Action
The opponent to your left chooses two: +2 Cards; +2 Actions; +$2 and +P.


Currant
$4 - Action
Trash any number of cards from your hand.  +$1 for each card trashed this way.
Each other player may trash up to two cards from his hand.
Gain the trashed cards.


Kiwi
$5 - Action
+$2
Each other player may reveal an Estate.  If no Estates are revealed, +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1.


Gooseberry
$5 - Action
You may discard up to two cards. If you discard a Treasure, +4 Cards, +1 Action.  If you discard two cards, +1 Buy.
Each other player may discard a Treasure. If he does, he draws 2 cards.


Mango
$5 - Action
Each opponent may choose one: gain a Copper in hand, or gain an Estate in hand.
Choose three of the following: +1 Card, +1 Action, +$1, +1 Buy.  (The choices don't have to be different.)
--
(Rules clarification:  Like with Pawn, you have to choose all three before drawing any cards.)


Nectarine
$3 - Action
The player to your left reveals two cards costing more than $0 from his hand. Name one.
Gain a card of the same price as the named card.
--
(Rule clarification: If he have less than two cards costing more than $0, he reveal his hand, and you gain no benefit.)


Pineapple
$5 - Action
+1 Action
Each other player may trash a card from his hand. If anyone does, +$3. If no one does, you may trash a card from your hand, +$2 if you do.


Elderberry
$3* - Action
+1 Action
+1 Card
Each other player may trash a card from hand.  If a [This Card] is in play, +1 VP for each card trashed.
--
If another card that allows trashing on play is in the kingdom, this card costs $6.


Dragonfruit
$5 - Treasure
Worth $3
Each other player may trash a card from his hand.


Papaya
$5 - Action
Gain a Gold in hand. Discard 2 cards. Every other player may gain a Silver in hand.


Kumquat
$5 - Action
+$3
Each other player may gain 2 coppers, putting one into their hand.


Huckleberry
$6 - Action
+$2
+1 Buy
+$1 per differently named action card you have in play (including this).
When you play this card, each other player may place a card on top of his deck, or gain a Copper, putting it into his hand.


Carambola
$4 - Action
+$3
Clockwise starting from the player on your left, each player chooses one: +1 VP; +1 Card; gain a Silver; trash a card from hand. No player may choose the same option as any previous player.