Print

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

Dame Anna (trash up to 2 from hand)

14 (12.5%)

Dame Josephine (worth 2 VP)

3 (2.7%)

Dame Molly (+2 Actions)

4 (3.6%)

Dame Natalie (gain a card up to $3)

4 (3.6%)

Dame Sylvia (+$2)

6 (5.4%)

Sir Bailey (+1 Card, +1 Action)

19 (17%)

Sir Destry (+2 Cards)

2 (1.8%)

Sir Martin (+2 Buys) (EDIT: and costs $4)

1 (0.9%)

Sir Michael (other players discard down to 3)

47 (42%)

Sir Vander (on trash, gain Gold)

12 (10.7%)

Total Members Voted: 112

[blueblimp]

Which knight do you think will be the best (i.e. strongest)?

Full descriptions: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20240121/dark_ages/3.jpg. I put the non-jousting effects along with the poll options.

[Grujah]

Destry or Michael.

[cooperaa]

Was between Michael and Anna for me.  I figured trashing might be better than making others discard.

[jotheonah]

An early lead for Sir Cantrip. 

[Grujah]

Natalie seems the worst.

[jsh357]

Michael seems best to me.  A hand attack AND a trash attack?  Geez.

[blueblimp]

My guess is Anna, provided the game has no other trasher. Having the only trasher on the board is a big advantage.

Michael, Molly, and Martin can also be excellent if you can't get their benefits from any other card present. The rest aren't too special.

[Beyond Awesome]

Michael and Anna seem the best. I went with Anna though because I think that the trashing effect will come in more handy.

[Jorbles]

Whoa, these are crazy. So you could have a game with all kingdom cards being Knights?

[Beyond Awesome]

My guess is Anna, provided the game has no other trasher. Having the only trasher on the board is a big advantage.

Michael, Molly, and Martin can also be excellent if you can't get their benefits from any other card present. The rest aren't too special.

I think even though Josephine provides no effect, that 2VP bonus might mean the difference between winning and losing the game, especially if both players play similar strategies.

[Ozle]

Whoa, these are crazy. So you could have a game with all kingdom cards being Knights?

no, they are individual cards that go in one stack.

[Beyond Awesome]

Whoa, these are crazy. So you could have a game with all kingdom cards being Knights?

No. It is one supply pile. They are ten unique characters.

ninja'd

[mnavratil]

I don't foresee the trashing from Anna being all that good. There's a reason Trading Post is way worse after the opening, and ever opening Anna seems very remote. Sure the whole set makes trashing better, but I don't know about that good. I voted for Michael because the combo attack just seems way more powerful on average.

[rinkworks]

Anna (with no other trasher), Molly (in an engine game), Michael, and Bailey all look strong.

Josephine is dangerous, because although that 2 VP might mean the difference in a close game, what if you lose her to a duel with another knight?  Then you might as well not have had a bonus at all.

Come to think of it, maybe for that reason Vander is the best one!

Any votes for Martin?  The bonus isn't much, but the reduced cost is huge.

[blueblimp]

Any votes for Martin?  The bonus isn't much, but the reduced cost is huge.

Whoa, I didn't even notice the reduced cost. I'll edit it into the poll if possible.

In fact, surely it's a printing error? It makes no sense to have 9 $5 knights and 1 $4 knight, especially since the attack is so strong.

[Jorbles]

Whoa, these are crazy. So you could have a game with all kingdom cards being Knights?

no, they are individual cards that go in one stack.

Oh awesome, that's even cooler.

[mnavratil]

These knights sure look like they will make the opening of the game pretty darn swingy...

[jonts26]

It's martin that costs $4, not michael.

[blueblimp]

It's martin that costs $4, not michael.

Gah. (It's fixed now.)

[ftl]

It'll be whichever one provides a bonus not easily available in the supply.

If the only village is a $5 village, then you'll be short on villages and "+2 actions" will be a good knight to have. Likewise, if the only card draw costs 5 or more, than the moat-knight is good. If a knight is the only source of +buy, then the +buy knight is great.

I voted for the discard-attack knight.

...also, there needs to be a "knights vs rogues" poll. 

[^_^_^_^]

Natalie. Works really well with a NV/Bridge I bet!

[DG]

I wouldn't discount Natalie. Filling your deck with silver might be a very good defense against enemy knights.

Anyone want a secret chamber?

[eHalcyon]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

[Graystripe77]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

We should start calling them by those kind of names. Ser Terminal, Dame Trasher, Etc.

[GendoIkari]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

We should start calling them by those kind of names. Ser Terminal, Dame Trasher, Etc.

Someone beat you to it:

http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=4118.msg88967#msg88967

[Taco Lobster]

Dame Anna (trash up to 2 from hand) = Dame Trash
Dame Josephine (worth 2 VP) = Dame VP
Dame Molly (+2 Actions) = Dame Village
Dame Natalie (gain a card up to $3) = Dame Workshop
Dame Sylvia (+$2) = Dame Silver
Sir Bailey (+1 Card, +1 Action) = Sir Cantrip
Sir Destry (+2 Cards) = Sir Cards (Sir Moat?)
Sir Martin (+2 Buys) = Sir Buy
Sir Michael = Sir Militia
Sir Vander (on trash, gain Gold) = Sir Gold?

[Grujah]

You still need to remember wee-wee or no wee-wee

Easy

Trasher Knight
VP Knight
Action Knight Village Knight
Workshop Knight
Silver Knight
Cantrip Knight
Drawer Knight
Cheap Knight
Militia Knight
Golden Knight

[mnavratil]

I like to think of Sir Vander as the Suicidal Knight.

[Grujah]

Or Bounty Knight?

[Taco Lobster]

Or Bounty Knight?

Maybe it's just me, but that makes me think of the paper towels...

[gman314]

It seems that I'm one of a select group who think that Vander is awesome just for countering other knights. Only playing will tell.

[Donald X.]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

We should start calling them by those kind of names. Ser Terminal, Dame Trasher, Etc.

Are you sure that's such a good idea, Sir Bad Ideas?

[jotheonah]

Hey Donald, how DID you pick their names? Are they homages to people involved in the creation of Dominion? Are they just names you liked? Will this be in the Secret History?

[Donald X.]

Hey Donald, how DID you pick their names? Are they homages to people involved in the creation of Dominion? Are they just names you liked? Will this be in the Secret History?

Yes, the Secret History covers that.

[eHalcyon]

Vander is clearly a homunculus fashioned by Alchemists using all their extra lead.

[theory]

Hey Donald, how DID you pick their names? Are they homages to people involved in the creation of Dominion? Are they just names you liked? Will this be in the Secret History?

Yes, the Secret History covers that.

It's a long story, involving one game designer's sad tale of schizophrenia, gender confusion, and time travel.

[Grujah]

Vander is clearly a homunculus fashioned by Alchemists using all their extra lead.

Heh, from small preview picture to me he looked a bit like Frazetta's Death Dealer

[Captain_Frisk]

Hey Donald, how DID you pick their names? Are they homages to people involved in the creation of Dominion? Are they just names you liked? Will this be in the Secret History?

Yes, the Secret History covers that.

It's a long story, involving one game designer's sad tale of schizophrenia, gender confusion, and time travel.

I probably could have passed on it were it not for time travel.  (Side note: Timechangers - add it to your netflix queue now!)

[Beyond Awesome]

Hey Donald, how DID you pick their names? Are they homages to people involved in the creation of Dominion? Are they just names you liked? Will this be in the Secret History?

Yes, the Secret History covers that.

It's a long story, involving one game designer's sad tale of schizophrenia, gender confusion, and time travel.

Ah, sounds like Cloud Atlas.

[Graystripe77]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

We should start calling them by those kind of names. Ser Terminal, Dame Trasher, Etc.

Are you sure that's such a good idea, Sir Bad Ideas?

Not all my ideas are bad, just most of them.

[RiemannZetaJones]

I don't think we can expect the Knights to last long in the deck, so the ones that confer some sort of lasting benefit will be better than the ones that don't. This makes Dame Natalie and Sir Vander more of a good idea than might at first be surmised. Also, Sir Michael will slow down the opponent a bit, which should be a good way to win a Knight-v-Knight slugfest.

[Ozle]

Thinking about this, are Knight Wars the new Ambassador Wars.

If you can kill off all his Knights first and still have some left, you are in a much better position!

[Grujah]

I don't think we can expect the Knights to last long in the deck, so the ones that confer some sort of lasting benefit will be better than the ones that don't. This makes Dame Natalie and Sir Vander more of a good idea than might at first be surmised. Also, Sir Michael will slow down the opponent a bit, which should be a good way to win a Knight-v-Knight slugfest.

This is true, actually. Also makes VP Knight kinda worst.

[michaeljb]

Michael, obviously.

Wait, how are the knights different?

[Loschmidt]

I don't think we can expect the Knights to last long in the deck, so the ones that confer some sort of lasting benefit will be better than the ones that don't. This makes Dame Natalie and Sir Vander more of a good idea than might at first be surmised. Also, Sir Michael will slow down the opponent a bit, which should be a good way to win a Knight-v-Knight slugfest.

This is true, actually. Also makes VP Knight kinda worst.

I was worried about Dame Josephine (Dame VP if you're not Donald) too, but then I remembered all of the benefits to the dual action/victory. Like the fact that she for reals combos with Scout and draws with Crossroads, counts for Silk Road, etc etc. And my favourite one, you can Rebuild her into a Province.

[gman314]

I voted for Vander, and now I'm more convinced. He's the only one who will give a permanent bonus to the deck without being played. (And keep in mind, that with an early Knight you could quite possibly draw Knight/Estate or Knight/copper, forcing a dead Knight.) That is a huge plus in my books. The next two are Anna and Natalie. Both of them give a permanent bonus to the deck after a single play. Michael comes close behind thanks to allowing a single play to hurt opponents significantly. Since such a play will likely come in the early game, it will be quite devastating. Then, the next 5 are in the same camp. They require other infrastructure to use effectively and can't work with just a single play. Bailey won't hurt your deck, so why not have him? Molly can probably find work quite quickly and Sylvia will just do her thing with minimal collision chance. Destry will work OK for either an engine or a BM deck and is pretty good. Martin provides the least useful infrastructure and will need quite an engine around a card which can be spitefully trashed by an opponent choosing to sacrifice their own Knight (eg, Vander). However, his cost of $4 helps him by making him a powerful (and swingy) opening. Last is Josephine. You have to be very careful playing her in the late game or anytime if your opponent has Vander. I would not hesitate to sacrifice a card I likely wouldn't play again in order to rob my opponent of 2 VP in a tight, late game. And, Vander just makes it more appealing.

So, here is my list:
1. Vander
2. Anna
3. Natalie
4. Michael
5. Bailey
6. Martin
7. Sylvia
8. Destry
9. Molly
10. Josephine

[chesskidnate]

Vander is clearly a homunculus fashioned by Alchemists transmutes using all their extra lead.

FTFY

[eHalcyon]

Vander is clearly a homunculus fashioned by Alchemists transmutes using all their extra lead.

FTFY

Transmutes aren't people.  A "transmute" can't fashion a homunculus.

[Rhombus]

I honestly feel like most of the Knights are fairly well balanced and will really be board dependent.

[Kirian]

I vote for Sir Cantrip.  Whatever is on the board, he can fit in.  A good reliable fellow.

We should start calling them by those kind of names. Ser Terminal, Dame Trasher, Etc.

Are you sure that's such a good idea, Sir Bad Ideas?

They obviously should have named them Sir Loin, Sir Plus, Sir Cumference, Dame Nation, Dame Early, Dame Onic... etc.

[NoMoreFun]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

[jotheonah]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

That pun is bad and you should feel bad.

[engineer]

Transmutes aren't people.

Even if they can't talk and their gender doesn't match their sex, a human being is a human being.

That pun is awesome and you should feel awesome.

[engineer]

I think you guys are overestimating Sir Michael.  Remember how everybody hates Saboteur?  That's because Saboteur doesn't do anything for you -- it's just an attack, and a terminal at that.  I mean, the saboteur attack is at least as strong as the knight trashing attack, even with the consolation prize, because it guarantees a target and it has no upper limit.  It still ends being a trap most of the time.  If the saboteur gained a discard attack, sure, it would be stronger.  But would it be great?  I'm not sure about that.

Sir Bailey, on the other hand, is one of only two knights that is not a terminal.  The other one, with just +2 actions and no card draw, is also usually a trap, as we're all well aware.  But Sir Bailey is nonterminal and draws a card, so in my book, Sir Bailey stands tallest.

Think of it this way: how many cantrip attacks are there in Dominion?

[jotheonah]

But the advantage to cantrip attacks is they're spammable. So uniqueness kind of cancels that out.

[engineer]

But the advantage to cantrip attacks is they're spammable. So uniqueness kind of cancels that out.

I'll grant you that.  But with Sir Bailey, you'll never have a collision.  You'll never have to make that wrenching decision: do I play my knight, or do I play my chancellor?  ( Kidding about that last part obviously, but you get my point.) That means that Sir Bailey will be played more than any of the terminal knights, making his attack more powerful.

[Loschmidt]

I think you guys are overestimating Sir Michael.  Remember how everybody hates Saboteur?  That's because Saboteur doesn't do anything for you -- it's just an attack, and a terminal at that.

Yeah that is true. And I did consider that before voting for old Michael. But, while Michael doesn't do anything for your current turn it screws with your opponent on their next turn, and on their overall deck quality. Hurting your opponent in the short and long term is quite powerful.

[Rhombus]

After playing a few games with Knights, I think it can really be summed up to this:

Which knights are better really depends on the board.  Who got which knight didn't make any difference in the outcome of the game, honestly.  Though if one of them is underpowered, it's probably Sir Vander.