Print

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

[Rush_Clasic]

Blockade (4)
Action - Duration
+2 Cards
At the start of your next turn: +1 Card
-----
While this is in play, whenever a player shuffles their deck, look at the top card of it afterwards. You may have them put that card on the bottom of their deck.

• This was gonna be my entry for the dual-type contest. Then I reread the rules. :/
• The "reveal as many times as you like" rule for reactions has been bugging me, design-wise. Now that the rule is ingrained in my brain a bit deeper, I keep coming up with ideas that either don't work or require ugly text to do so. Turns out, though, that just making durations is an easy way to get the effect to work. This started out as a reaction, but is way cleaner as a duration.
• I thought about making this an Attack and adding "Players may reveal Reaction cards as though you just played this." But that seems needlessly messy. There are cards that mess with players that aren't attacks, and they all seem to be for logistical reasons, so I'm doing the same.
• EDIT: Changed it from the basic Spy ability to a reverse Pearl Diver, to avoid the infinite reshuffling scenario.

[FishingVillage]

Which cards are you thinking of that mess with opponents but don't count as attacks? When I think of pseudo attacks, Possession, Masquerade and Tribute come to mind. For those 3 cards, you can't selectively screw over your opponents, there just happen to be certain deck styles which those cards can exploit (though I'll admit Possession is absolutely infuriating). Blockade on the other hand lets you inspect a player's top card, and either leave it there or discard it. This is clearly the attack part of Spy, so I'm not sure why that doesn't count as an attack.

And it looks like Blockade stays out indefinitely... so can I do a Spy attack per Blockade in play whenever an opponent reshuffles?

[LastFootnote]

Uh, what happens if multiple players have one in play? Heck, what happens if one player has several in play?

[UltimaPenguin]

Which cards are you thinking of that mess with opponents but don't count as attacks? When I think of pseudo attacks, Possession, Masquerade and Tribute come to mind. For those 3 cards, you can't selectively screw over your opponents, there just happen to be certain deck styles which those cards can exploit (though I'll admit Possession is absolutely infuriating). Blockade on the other hand lets you inspect a player's top card, and either leave it there or discard it. This is clearly the attack part of Spy, so I'm not sure why that doesn't count as an attack.

And it looks like Blockade stays out indefinitely... so can I do a Spy attack per Blockade in play whenever an opponent reshuffles?

In addition to the non-attacks you mentioned, there's Noble Brigand's on-buy effect and Ill-Gotten gains on-gain effect. So there's certainly precedent for attack-like things that can't be blocked by moat or lighthouse.

Also, why would it stay out indefinitely? The wording is just like lighthouse.

[FishingVillage]

In addition to the non-attacks you mentioned, there's Noble Brigand's on-buy effect and Ill-Gotten gains on-gain effect. So there's certainly precedent for attack-like things that can't be blocked by moat or lighthouse.

Also, why would it stay out indefinitely? The wording is just like lighthouse.

Ah right, forgot about those two cards too. I guess I was thinking more about attacks that occurred on play, as attacks on buy or gain are harder to do consistently.

Also, looks like I totally misread the turn part, pardon my impatience

Edit: Well I'd rather not be such a downer, now that I have all my marbles back. I do think that having the Attack attribute added is necessary, because you are able to selectively mess with your opponent here (good card? it's gone until the next reshuffle! bad card card? okay you can deal with it). The +2 Cards, +1 Card next turn seems fair enough for $3 to begin with, so adding on a conditional inspect attack for another $1 seems fine.

[Rush_Clasic]

Which cards are you thinking of that mess with opponents but don't count as attacks? When I think of pseudo attacks, Possession, Masquerade and Tribute come to mind. For those 3 cards, you can't selectively screw over your opponents, there just happen to be certain deck styles which those cards can exploit (though I'll admit Possession is absolutely infuriating). Blockade on the other hand lets you inspect a player's top card, and either leave it there or discard it. This is clearly the attack part of Spy, so I'm not sure why that doesn't count as an attack.

I totally overlooked the existence of Spy when I made this. I was focused so much on the shuffle condition. That doesn't mean this ability shouldn't be this way, but it got me thinking. Here's the full card as I alluded to with the extra "attack" ability:

Blockade #2 (4)
Action - Attack - Duration
+2 Cards
At the start of your next turn: +1 Card
-----
While this is in play, whenever a player shuffles his deck, look at the top card of it afterwards. You may have him discard that card. Players may reveal Reaction cards as though you just played this.

You'd need something like that to make Reactions work to the actual attack. It just seems better to say this isn't an attack and let thing's slide, like with Ill-Gotten Gains.

can I do a Spy attack per Blockade in play whenever an opponent reshuffles?

Yes, each of them triggers and you'll spy one top card at a time.

Uh, what happens if multiple players have one in play? Heck, what happens if one player has several in play?

See above for one player having multiples. They resolve separately, so you'd dig through one card at a time (or just leave the card there eventually). As for multiple players, there isn't current precedent for how it would work (that I know of). So, it's time to make one: should it resolve in turn order or reverse turn order? I'm used to Magic, where it goes it reverse. That is, if you and I both have Blockades out, and I shuffle my library on my turn, my Blockade would trigger, then yours would trigger. After all triggers occur, yours resolves, then mine resolves (Last In, First Out). That doesn't mean it needs to work the same here. Dominion isn't concerned with these type of timing issues. I'd say just resolve them in turn order. Thus, if I shuffle and we both have one out, I Spy, then you Spy.

[FishingVillage]

Hmm, usually when there's something that everyone can do or has to do which can change card availability (such as the trashing choice from Governor or gaining Curses from Witch), it starts with yourself if it gives you a decision, then goes around clockwise to each other player (so then to the player to your left, then the player to the left of that player, all around). So resolving in turn order seems like the best rule to apply.

[LastFootnote]

See above for one player having multiples. They resolve separately, so you'd dig through one card at a time (or just leave the card there eventually). As for multiple players, there isn't current precedent for how it would work (that I know of). So, it's time to make one: should it resolve in turn order or reverse turn order? I'm used to Magic, where it goes it reverse. That is, if you and I both have Blockades out, and I shuffle my library on my turn, my Blockade would trigger, then yours would trigger. After all triggers occur, yours resolves, then mine resolves (Last In, First Out). That doesn't mean it needs to work the same here. Dominion isn't concerned with these type of timing issues. I'd say just resolve them in turn order. Thus, if I shuffle and we both have one out, I Spy, then you Spy.

Bwa ha ha! If there are more of these in play than that player has cards in his deck + discard, this could create an infinite loop! Player A shuffles and the other players make him discard all his cards, which then makes him shuffle again!

[razorborne]

See above for one player having multiples. They resolve separately, so you'd dig through one card at a time (or just leave the card there eventually). As for multiple players, there isn't current precedent for how it would work (that I know of). So, it's time to make one: should it resolve in turn order or reverse turn order? I'm used to Magic, where it goes it reverse. That is, if you and I both have Blockades out, and I shuffle my library on my turn, my Blockade would trigger, then yours would trigger. After all triggers occur, yours resolves, then mine resolves (Last In, First Out). That doesn't mean it needs to work the same here. Dominion isn't concerned with these type of timing issues. I'd say just resolve them in turn order. Thus, if I shuffle and we both have one out, I Spy, then you Spy.

Bwa ha ha! If there are more of these in play than that player has cards in his deck + discard, this could create an infinite loop! Player A shuffles and the other players make him discard all his cards, which then makes him shuffle again!

"...you may..."

[eHalcyon]

See above for one player having multiples. They resolve separately, so you'd dig through one card at a time (or just leave the card there eventually). As for multiple players, there isn't current precedent for how it would work (that I know of). So, it's time to make one: should it resolve in turn order or reverse turn order? I'm used to Magic, where it goes it reverse. That is, if you and I both have Blockades out, and I shuffle my library on my turn, my Blockade would trigger, then yours would trigger. After all triggers occur, yours resolves, then mine resolves (Last In, First Out). That doesn't mean it needs to work the same here. Dominion isn't concerned with these type of timing issues. I'd say just resolve them in turn order. Thus, if I shuffle and we both have one out, I Spy, then you Spy.

Bwa ha ha! If there are more of these in play than that player has cards in his deck + discard, this could create an infinite loop! Player A shuffles and the other players make him discard all his cards, which then makes him shuffle again!

"...you may..."

"...this could..."

[Rush_Clasic]

Hmmm... that'd have to be quite the chapel-ed and over-blockaded situation. It's not something I think would come up often, but it's sort of an ugly scenario. Best solution I could see:

"While this is in play, whenever a player shuffles their deck, look at the top card of it afterwards. You may have them put that card on the bottom of their deck."



This gives me another thought, though: is this card more interesting having you Spy the top cards of each player's reshuffle, or having the reshuffler? Imagine if it was this instead (possibly with a name change):

Blockade #3 (4)
Action - Duration
+2 Cards
At the start of your next turn: +1 Card
-----
While this is in play, whenever a player shuffles their deck, they look at the top card of it afterwards. They may put that card on the bottom of their deck.

It'd be an even trickier card to use, then. I gave it the card drawing so you could trigger your own reshuffles while its out. I don't know how much this weakens it, but it's an interesting direction.

[FishingVillage]

Hmm... would you be okay with Blockade only doing the Spy attack once on your next turn? In fact, if it worked on everyone and yourself, it would work nicely if the +1 draw was done after the Spy attack (so you could check if it was a card you wanted or not before you draw it). The recursive potential of the first version should be avoided, and thankfully that's mitigated in your new version.

Although, when you mention that it triggers on reshuffle, does that mean I can force a player to reveal and discard a card from the top of his deck if he's in the middle of drawing 5 cards during the Clean-up phase? I'm also curious now about whether Blockade is faster or Stash.

[Rush_Clasic]

Hmm... would you be okay with Blockade only doing the Spy attack once on your next turn? In fact, if it worked on everyone and yourself, it would work nicely if the +1 draw was done after the Spy attack (so you could check if it was a card you wanted or not before you draw it).

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. Are you saying:

• You shuffle in the middle of your turn.
• My Blockade triggers.
• At the start of my turn, I Spy your deck

You shuffle.

If so, that delay seems awkward to force on people. I don't want them to have to remember what happened in the middle of other player's turns. If that's not what you mean... elaborate, please?

Although, when you mention that it triggers on reshuffle, does that mean I can force a player to reveal and discard a card from the top of his deck if he's in the middle of drawing 5 cards during the Clean-up phase?

Yes.

I'm also curious now about whether Blockade is faster or Stash.

Stash gets placed while the shuffling occurs. Blockade waits until the shuffling is complete to do anything. You'd get to stack Stash anywhere you want; putting it sixth from the top is a neat mind-game to play on the Blockade player.

[FishingVillage]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. Are you saying:

• You shuffle in the middle of your turn.
• My Blockade triggers.
• At the start of my turn, I Spy your deck

You shuffle.

If so, that delay seems awkward to force on people. I don't want them to have to remember what happened in the middle of other player's turns. If that's not what you mean... elaborate, please?

Sure, I mean it would become a somewhat boring version like this:

Blockade #i (4)
Action - Duration
+2 Cards
At the start of your next turn: Each player (including you) reveals the top card of his deck and either puts it back or discards it, your choice, then +1 Card. This effect counts as playing an Attack card.

This is a far less exciting version of Blockade and only triggers once on your next turn, but it is helpful for your +1 Card and likely won't have any extremely strange corner cases. You can play multiples and they'll filter through your deck like a hot knife through butter, so it's still very useful as is. I can understand if this is not acceptable to the intended spirit of Blockade though.

[Rush_Clasic]

Ah... that's a sensible idea. Seems to obsolete Spy a bit at that cost.