Dominion Strategy Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]  All

Author Topic: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages  (Read 15427 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Copernicus

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 50
  • Respect: +31
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #25 on: August 24, 2012, 10:17:28 am »
+2

Did you ever try out having Spoils just be purchasable for $3? 

I was amused that two "Gain silver" cards were turned into "Gain spoils" since I've been struggling to compare Silver to Spoils in terms of how valuable it is.  And I kind of want to play a game where someone can choose to gain either Silver or Spoils for any card that gains silver...
Logged

Avin

  • Spy
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
  • Respect: +99
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #26 on: August 24, 2012, 12:33:12 pm »
0

Quote
Another Throne variant in Dark Ages didn't work out, and I thought of that old card and made this one. It does not go so crazy but can still facilitate a cool transforming engine.

If a card that facilitates acquiring 18 provinces by the end of turn 2 is not so crazy, I'd love to hear the Throne variant that was!
Logged

eHalcyon

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8689
  • Respect: +9156
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #27 on: August 24, 2012, 12:38:19 pm »
0

Quote
Another Throne variant in Dark Ages didn't work out, and I thought of that old card and made this one. It does not go so crazy but can still facilitate a cool transforming engine.

If a card that facilitates acquiring 18 provinces by the end of turn 2 is not so crazy, I'd love to hear the Throne variant that was!

That's not crazy because it requires 6 players cooperating.
Logged

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8165
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9544
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #28 on: August 24, 2012, 12:55:56 pm »
+1

Quote
Another Throne variant in Dark Ages didn't work out, and I thought of that old card and made this one. It does not go so crazy but can still facilitate a cool transforming engine.

If a card that facilitates acquiring 18 provinces by the end of turn 2 is not so crazy, I'd love to hear the Throne variant that was!

That's not crazy because it requires 6 players cooperating.

And immaculate shuffle luck.  How did he even come up with that?
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5499
  • Respect: +22174
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #29 on: August 24, 2012, 04:32:19 pm »
+2

Did you ever try out having Spoils just be purchasable for $3? 
Feast was originally "+$3, trash this" for $4.
Logged

Axe Knight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #30 on: August 24, 2012, 11:08:11 pm »
0

Were there ever any curse givers in Dark Ages? 
Logged
An Axe Knight draws near!  Command?

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5499
  • Respect: +22174
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #31 on: August 24, 2012, 11:20:51 pm »
+1

Were there ever any curse givers in Dark Ages?
Yes, as detailed in the secret history! Including an earlier Cultist and "Gain an Estate, each other player gains a Curse."
Logged

Axe Knight

  • Moneylender
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 170
  • Respect: +20
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #32 on: August 24, 2012, 11:30:19 pm »
0

Ahh!  Somehow, I missed that.  Thanks.  That was the one thing that jumped out of me about this set, but, I guess that's what Ruins are for.
Logged
An Axe Knight draws near!  Command?

Tmwinand

  • Ambassador
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 33
  • Respect: +30
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #33 on: August 24, 2012, 11:32:21 pm »
0

Just played 3 games with the new set.  Thanks DxV for making this and providing us with the secret histories!
Logged

Fuu

  • Bishop
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 114
  • Shuffle iT Username: Fuu
  • Respect: +86
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #34 on: August 26, 2012, 01:48:40 am »
0

Just want to say that I love the secret histories. They provide a fascinating insight into the design process and hearing about things like the failed Altar strategy is wonderful. Also, the secret history does a really good job of not giving away spoilers about how the cards that did make it into a set are best used.

Oh, and one more thing:

I'm also wondering why it was decided that there'd be exactly 5 different ruins, especially since it affected the design of the Shelters. Considering not much attention was paid to making them all internally balanced (Ruined Village), wouldn't having lots of different Ruins have been more interesting? I'm sure there was no shortage of ideas.
As explained, there are five (with those particular four) so you can learn them quickly. Some people would not like not knowing what they were.

That is one of the main reasons I really don't enjoy Race for the Galaxy.
Logged

Kuildeous

  • Cartographer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3816
  • Respect: +2186
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #35 on: August 28, 2012, 03:50:25 pm »
+1

Quote
Ruins obv. doesn't work, because some people would make out

Whoa, what kind of game were you trying to sell there, Donald?

I mean, in the right groups, this would be awesome, but I definitely don't want to make out with the average gamer.
Logged
A man has no signature

werothegreat

  • Adventurer
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8165
  • Shuffle iT Username: werothegreat
  • Let me tell you a secret...
  • Respect: +9544
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #36 on: August 28, 2012, 03:52:57 pm »
+1

Quote
Ruins obv. doesn't work, because some people would make out

Whoa, what kind of game were you trying to sell there, Donald?

I mean, in the right groups, this would be awesome, but I definitely don't want to make out with the average gamer.

Dominion: Spin the Bottle

----

Orgy
Action - $4

*CENSORED*
Logged
Contrary to popular belief, I do not run the wiki all on my own.  There are plenty of other people who are actively editing.  Go bother them!

Check out this fantasy epic adventure novel I wrote, the Broken Globe!  http://www.amazon.com/Broken-Globe-Tyr-Chronicles-Book-ebook/dp/B00LR1SZAS/

WheresMyElephant

  • Young Witch
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 135
  • Respect: +63
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #37 on: August 30, 2012, 10:28:31 am »
+4

After Guilds comes out, would you ever consider posting a list of cards (in full detail) that were fun but were cut for non-gameplay-related reasons like "Too much text to fit on the cards/finicky rules that would annoy casual players" or "Needed extra components" or "No room in the set for another Village"? Or even if there are some cards that are fun but a couple of specific interactions break them, and you could just warn us, "Hey don't play this one with King's Court you guys"?

I know we already have more cards than we could ever need, and I can of course understand if this runs afoul of the whole "designer-endorsed variants lead to trouble" concept, or various other reasons for not wanting to do this. But somehow I can't help being disappointed reading about fun cards I can't play; and I'm sure that for instance you have some great Duration or VP chip cards that we'll never get to see in print.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2012, 10:31:36 am by WheresMyElephant »
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
  • Respect: +1126
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #38 on: August 30, 2012, 02:18:52 pm »
0

After Guilds comes out, would you ever consider posting a list of cards (in full detail) that were fun but were cut for non-gameplay-related reasons like "Too much text to fit on the cards/finicky rules that would annoy casual players" or "Needed extra components" or "No room in the set for another Village"? Or even if there are some cards that are fun but a couple of specific interactions break them, and you could just warn us, "Hey don't play this one with King's Court you guys"?

I know we already have more cards than we could ever need, and I can of course understand if this runs afoul of the whole "designer-endorsed variants lead to trouble" concept, or various other reasons for not wanting to do this. But somehow I can't help being disappointed reading about fun cards I can't play; and I'm sure that for instance you have some great Duration or VP chip cards that we'll never get to see in print.

I would love to see this. I don't even think it would be a problem if you decided to make them official cards later.
Logged

ftl

  • Mountebank
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2028
  • Respect: +1295
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #39 on: August 30, 2012, 02:41:29 pm »
0

If he was going to make them official cards later, he certainly wouldn't post them in a pre-published form...
Logged

NoMoreFun

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1522
  • Respect: +1126
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #40 on: August 30, 2012, 03:48:08 pm »
0

If he was going to make them official cards later, he certainly wouldn't post them in a pre-published form...

I personally wouldn't have any problems, and would rather see cards that have a 1% chance of being made official in the future than not see them.
Logged

Donald X.

  • Dominion Designer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5499
  • Respect: +22174
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #41 on: September 08, 2012, 02:45:57 am »
+7

After Guilds comes out, would you ever consider posting a list of cards (in full detail) that were fun but were cut for non-gameplay-related reasons like "Too much text to fit on the cards/finicky rules that would annoy casual players" or "Needed extra components" or "No room in the set for another Village"? Or even if there are some cards that are fun but a couple of specific interactions break them, and you could just warn us, "Hey don't play this one with King's Court you guys"?
Without more work, that would amount to maybe one card, depending on whether or not we do more promos. If a card was worth doing it made a set; the ones that didn't make it are earlier versions of things that made it in better forms, or things that people didn't like, or which seemed unfixable. I am not sitting on a file of great cards that didn't make it. Anything that seemed like it should really be in a set and wasn't yet, I worked on for Dark Ages (which was going to be the last set; I started Guilds later but finished it first). And my outtakes section is pretty complete there.

I could post more outtakes for the earlier sets someday, since those Secret Histories didn't go into as much detail, since those outtakes didn't know so much if they would ever make it or not. They will not be cards worth proxying up, but I will try to get to posting them someday.
Logged

Polk5440

  • Torturer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1708
  • Respect: +1786
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion for The Secret History of Dark Ages
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2012, 11:13:54 pm »
0

Quote
- There was an old old card, gain a Silver to hand, each other player gains a Copper to hand, for $5. Way back when, we didn't know any better, and this card seemed okay. Then I tried a bunch of things to make this good enough, eventually drifting into "+1 Card +1 Action +$1, each other player gains a Copper in hand then discards down to 4." In the end nothing has survived. Giving other players Copper is bad in general because the pile varies in size so much, depending on the number of players and whether or not you add together the main set and Intrigue. It's fine if the attack is limited as to how much Copper it will really give out, like Jester and Noble Brigand and Ambassador.

Good to know for future design contests...

So this is why you are doing so well in rinkworks's design contest -- you're doing some serious research!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All
 

Page created in 0.148 seconds with 27 queries.