Print

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

[Polk5440]

Congrats to the winner. I am really glad a "save it for later" treasure-reaction mechanic won.

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

I get why the self-spy ability is thematic, now.

[rinkworks]

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

If it's deliberate, I would assume it's so something like Golem couldn't just automatically cause all copies of this to be discarded and therefore activated.

But I agree it's vague.  Is there a clear distinction between "set aside world" (where Golem, Hunting Party, and Fortune Teller put cards, for example) and "look at world" (where Lookout, Spy, and Cartographer put cards)?  I would assume the intention for Crystal Ball is that the latter group activates it, while the former group does not.  But I don't know off-hand if that distinction is always clear.

[Polk5440]

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

If it's deliberate, I would assume it's so something like Golem couldn't just automatically cause all copies of this to be discarded and therefore activated.

But I agree it's vague.  Is there a clear distinction between "set aside world" (where Golem, Hunting Party, and Fortune Teller put cards, for example) and "look at world" (where Lookout, Spy, and Cartographer put cards)?  I would assume the intention for Crystal Ball is that the latter group activates it, while the former group does not.  But I don't know off-hand if that distinction is always clear.

Could this be clarified by the author?

Also, I am a little confused why with this (or the other cards) it would be such a concern to have Golem activate the cards? It would have the same feel as Chancellor-Stash, right?

[rinkworks]

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

If it's deliberate, I would assume it's so something like Golem couldn't just automatically cause all copies of this to be discarded and therefore activated.

But I agree it's vague.  Is there a clear distinction between "set aside world" (where Golem, Hunting Party, and Fortune Teller put cards, for example) and "look at world" (where Lookout, Spy, and Cartographer put cards)?  I would assume the intention for Crystal Ball is that the latter group activates it, while the former group does not.  But I don't know off-hand if that distinction is always clear.

Could this be clarified by the author?

Also, I am a little confused why with this (or the other cards) it would be such a concern to have Golem activate the cards? It would have the same feel as Chancellor-Stash, right?

That's another good question, yeah.  It feels like Golem-CB would be too powerful to allow, but it may just be an appropriately great combo.  The comparison to Chancellor-Stash is excellent.  There's a difference, though:  playing a Golem would cause all your Crystal Balls to be played THAT turn, whereas with Chancellor they get played the NEXT turn.  That's a huge difference, albeit one that may well be compensated for by the fact that Golem is such a difficult card to buy.

Any other dangerous cards like this?  Adventurer would not skip over Crystal Balls; nor would Library.  Hunting Party might activate all but one, but you'd need a stack of them to do it reliably, and that would make it hard to get a stack of Crystal Balls (both cards being at the same price point), and a stack of Hunting Parties is often a winning deck anyway.

Fortune Teller could easily activate all your CBs, but you can't do that to yourself.  Sage would stop on Crystal Ball instead of skipping over them.  I might well be missing something here, but I'm not seeing any particular problem with the "other than from play" wording.

[ChocophileBenj]

Geeeee, I KNEW I should have kept a treasure-reaction, when I saw those people complaining about victory cards !!! It was called "Bribe", too !

Crystal Ball's treasure part is a spying silver, still good to have ! The reaction part looks like Tunnel except it is more powerful. And it can be strong with cards that benefit from low-hands/hands without treasure (Library, Tactician, Poor House !)

[One Armed Man]

I know it sounds like a completely different card and too similar to Tunnel, but what about if it wasn't "played" when you discard it, you just gain another copy?

[eHalcyon]

Congrats to the winner. I am really glad a "save it for later" treasure-reaction mechanic won.

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

I get why the self-spy ability is thematic, now.

I just thought it sounded better.  I never thought of confusion with "set aside" vs. "look at" discarders.  I am fine with "other than from play" as it does seem to be clearer.  I would say that the combo with Golem would be fine.

I also like the wording change that someone proposed during the voting stage, "at the start of your next buy phase".  That helps make the mechanic clearer.

The name was chosen to tie it thematically to not only official cards like Fortune Teller and Oracle but also another card in the set, Soothsayer, and my submission to the other contest, Harbinger.  With Soothsayer, Crystal Ball is pretty much a free pass.  I was back and forth on including the mini-Spy effect, but I just really liked how it tied into the card name.

[Schneau]

Congrats to the winner. I am really glad a "save it for later" treasure-reaction mechanic won.

Is there a reason why Crystal Ball is worded "When you discard this from your hand or from your deck..." rather than "When you discard this other than from play..."? I find the "from your deck" a little vague.

I get why the self-spy ability is thematic, now.

I just thought it sounded better.  I never thought of confusion with "set aside" vs. "look at" discarders.  I am fine with "other than from play" as it does seem to be clearer.  I would say that the combo with Golem would be fine.

Agreed.

I also like the wording change that someone proposed during the voting stage, "at the start of your next buy phase".  That helps make the mechanic clearer.

Thanks, that was me!

The name was chosen to tie it thematically to not only official cards like Fortune Teller and Oracle but also another card in the set, Soothsayer, and my submission to the other contest, Harbinger.  With Soothsayer, Crystal Ball is pretty much a free pass.  I was back and forth on including the mini-Spy effect, but I just really liked how it tied into the card name.

This was the part of the card that made me give it 2 votes, I think! I really liked the self-synergy.

[Polk5440]

The name was chosen to tie it thematically to not only official cards like Fortune Teller and Oracle but also another card in the set, Soothsayer, and my submission to the other contest, Harbinger.  With Soothsayer, Crystal Ball is pretty much a free pass.  I was back and forth on including the mini-Spy effect, but I just really liked how it tied into the card name.

Ooooh, slick. I didn't even think about Soothsayer. Nice synergy, indeed.

[yuma]

#9 - Heiress by yuma with 7 points (Allen)
$5 - Action-Attack-Victory
Worth 2 VP
--
Discard a card that is neither a Treasure nor an Action; if you do all other players gain a Curse.

I was a little frustrated when I saw what I did here... too late. I had changed the wording to "Treasure nor an Action" because of the Ruins--which I never checked fully about and are indeed actions as well--so that this card could discard them.

What I really wanted and started out to accomplish was to only allow discarding of Victory cards and Curses (but then Ruins made me change it unnecessarily). But I still wonder if it would be too weak.

[NoMoreFun]

Well done to the winner

$3 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $1
When you play this, +1 Card. You may put a card on top of your deck.
--
When you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, put your deck in your discard pile. Then, either put the gained card on top of your deck, or set it aside. Discard the set aside cards at the start of your next turn.

I got the impression a lot of people misunderstood my card (hence only getting 2 points).

The card's mainly there for the reaction. I wanted to make the treasure interesting though, so I put in the +1 card (so a venture at best), then put in the top decking so if you drew an action card it couldn't hurt you. Maybe I shouldn't have made it optional - I'll definitely rework the treasure for later use.

The reaction's main purpose is to have victory cards miss a reshuffle, which enables greening. I don't think any existing card lets you do this. The reshuffle is an important aspect of the game that only advanced players use to its full extent, so I thought it would be a good space to design in. I can't wait for the duration challenge if there is one. The watchtower effect is there for a bit more utility, and while it's stronger than watchtower if you're gaining a single card, since the chancellor effect isn't optional, you can only ever guarantee one card for your next hand, so I thought it was balanced.

The thing I liked most was that if you wanted the reaction for your end of turn buy, you had to forgo playing the treasure. I like action/treasure fan cards that have that kind of choice, but they weren't allowed here.

I guess I'll keep it simple next time.

[Schneau]

Well done to the winner

$3 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $1
When you play this, +1 Card. You may put a card on top of your deck.
--
When you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, put your deck in your discard pile. Then, either put the gained card on top of your deck, or set it aside. Discard the set aside cards at the start of your next turn.

I got the impression a lot of people misunderstood my card (hence only getting 2 points).

The card's mainly there for the reaction. I wanted to make the treasure interesting though, so I put in the +1 card (so a venture at best), then put in the top decking so if you drew an action card it couldn't hurt you. Maybe I shouldn't have made it optional - I'll definitely rework the treasure for later use.

The reaction's main purpose is to have victory cards miss a reshuffle, which enables greening. I don't think any existing card lets you do this. The reshuffle is an important aspect of the game that only advanced players use to its full extent, so I thought it would be a good space to design in. I can't wait for the duration challenge if there is one. The watchtower effect is there for a bit more utility, and while it's stronger than watchtower if you're gaining a single card, since the chancellor effect isn't optional, you can only ever guarantee one card for your next hand, so I thought it was balanced.

The thing I liked most was that if you wanted the reaction for your end of turn buy, you had to forgo playing the treasure. I like action/treasure fan cards that have that kind of choice, but they weren't allowed here.

I guess I'll keep it simple next time.

I think the main problem here is that the Treasure portion of the card is too strong. If you think about it, it's basically a Peddler, since it doesn't use an Action and gives you +1 Card, +$1. Of course, unlike Peddler, you can't use an Action card you draw. But, you can also optionally topdeck something, which is also helpful. So, even just the Treasure part of the card should probably cost at least $4. Adding in a pretty strong Reaction definitely means this card should be at least $5. The Reaction, even though it's interesting, is wordy and confusing - you may want to try to iron it out a little. But, besides the pricing problems and the wordiness, I like both parts of this card.

[eHalcyon]

Well done to the winner

$3 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $1
When you play this, +1 Card. You may put a card on top of your deck.
--
When you gain a card, you may reveal this from your hand. If you do, put your deck in your discard pile. Then, either put the gained card on top of your deck, or set it aside. Discard the set aside cards at the start of your next turn.

I got the impression a lot of people misunderstood my card (hence only getting 2 points).

The card's mainly there for the reaction. I wanted to make the treasure interesting though, so I put in the +1 card (so a venture at best), then put in the top decking so if you drew an action card it couldn't hurt you. Maybe I shouldn't have made it optional - I'll definitely rework the treasure for later use.

The reaction's main purpose is to have victory cards miss a reshuffle, which enables greening. I don't think any existing card lets you do this. The reshuffle is an important aspect of the game that only advanced players use to its full extent, so I thought it would be a good space to design in. I can't wait for the duration challenge if there is one. The watchtower effect is there for a bit more utility, and while it's stronger than watchtower if you're gaining a single card, since the chancellor effect isn't optional, you can only ever guarantee one card for your next hand, so I thought it was balanced.

The thing I liked most was that if you wanted the reaction for your end of turn buy, you had to forgo playing the treasure. I like action/treasure fan cards that have that kind of choice, but they weren't allowed here.

I guess I'll keep it simple next time.

Not sure if it works well for that purpose. If you use it right after the reshuffle, you skip through a bunch of good cards to get to a top decked green. Yeah, it misses reshuffle, but you also saw it much sooner than you needed to. Reshuffling often is bad when you get into the greening stage, and this card triggers many reshuffles.

Edit: oh, set aside too. While that helps, the increased reshuffling point still stands.

[Saucery]

#8 - Livestock by Saucery with 8 points (Foote)
$4 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $0
Choose one: Trash a card from your hand, +$1; or trash this card immediately, +$2.
--
When you discard a card other than during a Clean-up phase, you may reveal this card from your hand. If you do, trash the discarded card.

I was surprised to hear people think this card was weak. I thought it was only weak with no discarding effects, very strong with certain cards (warehouse, cellar, storeroom, cartographer, navigator, embassy), and utterly broken with searching cards like adventurer, golem, sage. In fact, it might still be those things

[eHalcyon]

#4 (tie) - Deed (1) by Mecherath with 10 points (Diamond)
$5 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $2
--
When you gain a victory card, you may discard this from your hand.  If you do, +2 VP.

I just wanted to say that I really liked this entry.  It is something of a game changer, but not in a game-breaking way.  It lets you get a "Duchy" by buying Estate (possibly at a slightly discount, since you only needed to have $4, including Deed).  It lets you get an almost-Province by buying Duchy with $7.  It would have a big effect on PPR and would also do interesting things for alt VP strategies.

Someone commented that it was weird how Diamond/Deed wasn't getting heat for using VP tokens when others did.  The reason is that this card won't put you into a "game won't end" situation, since it only grants VP when you buy VP.  Very elegant.

[WanderingWinder]

#4 (tie) - Deed (1) by Mecherath with 10 points (Diamond)
$5 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $2
--
When you gain a victory card, you may discard this from your hand.  If you do, +2 VP.

I just wanted to say that I really liked this entry.  It is something of a game changer, but not in a game-breaking way.  It lets you get a "Duchy" by buying Estate (possibly at a slightly discount, since you only needed to have $4, including Deed).  It lets you get an almost-Province by buying Duchy with $7.  It would have a big effect on PPR and would also do interesting things for alt VP strategies.

Someone commented that it was weird how Diamond/Deed wasn't getting heat for using VP tokens when others did.  The reason is that this card won't put you into a "game won't end" situation, since it only grants VP when you buy VP.  Very elegant.

I just want to point out that the top half of the card is exactly Bronze, from my expansion posted in these forums.

[Watno]

The top half is exactly Silver, from Dominion (or Dominion: Intrigue or Dominion Base:Cards)?

[WanderingWinder]

The top half is exactly Silver, from Dominion (or Dominion: Intrigue or Dominion Base:Cards)?

Whoops, sorry. Deed (2) (AKA Hughes) fits the description I give in reply 90.

[NoMoreFun]

The top half is exactly Silver, from Dominion (or Dominion: Intrigue or Dominion Base:Cards)?

Whoops, sorry. Deed (2) (AKA Hughes) fits the description I give in reply 90.

Sorry about that. This would be the 2nd time I came up with the same idea as you for a card inadvertently. Rinkworks PM'd me when I submitted a card for the village challenge (+2 cards, discard cards for +1 action each) that was identical to one of your posted cards. No PM this time.

I'd like to try it out with compulsory topdecking as a $1 card.

Edit: Reading through the topic it seems like it was that at some point. Mandatory topdecking would make it balanced, but I'm not sure if it would ever be interesting.

[Mecherath]

#4 (tie) - Deed (1) by Mecherath with 10 points (Diamond)
$5 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $2
--
When you gain a victory card, you may discard this from your hand.  If you do, +2 VP.

I just wanted to say that I really liked this entry.  It is something of a game changer, but not in a game-breaking way.  It lets you get a "Duchy" by buying Estate (possibly at a slightly discount, since you only needed to have $4, including Deed).  It lets you get an almost-Province by buying Duchy with $7.  It would have a big effect on PPR and would also do interesting things for alt VP strategies.

Someone commented that it was weird how Diamond/Deed wasn't getting heat for using VP tokens when others did.  The reason is that this card won't put you into a "game won't end" situation, since it only grants VP when you buy VP.  Very elegant.

Thanks!  I noticed that quite a few people liked the card, which gives me the strength to keep going in these contests.  It could be that testing reveals that the cost, +$, or +VP needs to be tweaked, but I still like the concept.  The competition is so high on these, but we'll have a fun set at the end.  And really, the top few from any contest might start getting incorporated into my own games... if I get enough RL games in to get tired of Donald's cards.

I also loved that Diamond happened to get assigned to a Treasure/Reaction.

[zahlman]

Honestly, I think Diamond is a better name for it than Deed

[eHalcyon]

Honestly, I think Diamond is a better name for it than Deed

Deed makes sense though.  It's based on purchasing VP, which is usually land.  Wondering if some sort of adjective could be attached to spice it up.

[Mecherath]

Honestly, I think Diamond is a better name for it than Deed

Deed makes sense though.  It's based on purchasing VP, which is usually land.  Wondering if some sort of adjective could be attached to spice it up.

Trusty Deed!

[One Armed Man]

Because of Crystal Ball's many uses in this set, I have performed an analysis in the Card List thread and posted this there:

Crystal Ball idea:
$6 - Treasure-Reaction
Worth $2
When you play this, reveal the top 2 cards of your deck, discard one and put the other back.
--
When you discard this from your hand or from your deck, you may reveal it and set it aside.  In your next Buy phase, play this card.