Print

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

[rinkworks]

There are currently 26 cards in the set.  That's pretty full already.  But what the heck -- it's not like we're constrained by any practical limits, right?  So let's top the set off with a couple more.

What follows is a ballot of runners-up from the 18 challenges of this competition.  Not all of them, however -- I skewed the selection in favor of those card creators who don't already have cards in the set.  There was probably no way to strike this balance to everyone's satisfaction, so I don't expect everyone to be entirely happy about it, but it was a balance that felt right to me, and I went with it.

The logic is as follows:

* Every card placing 2nd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have MULTIPLE winning cards in the set.  Most 2nd-place cards got included this way, but a couple did not.

* Every card placing 3rd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have ANY winning cards in the set.  The majority of 3rd-place cards got included this way, but several did not.

Using this algorithm, 27 cards qualified for this runners-up round.  That makes for a smaller ballot than usual, but according to voters they're the best of the cards that didn't land spots in the set.  Since the real names have already been revealed, it didn't make sense to use aliases this time, so they appear here under their real names.  Of course the winners can be renamed if there seems to be a particular reason to do so.

After the vote, the top 2 cards will be inducted into the set.

--

(Actual ballot deleted, so that users will not be confused between the original versions of the cards and the final ballot.)

Authors of cards in this round have been given a chance to make revisions to their cards.  Those revisions are complete now.

--

The Ballot
The Results

[Robz888]

Yay, I have a card in here. Vote for it! Can we talk up our own cards now that the cats are out of their respective bags?

Separately, I kind of like Retirement Village a lot, this time around... and it's not even mine, so there.

[werothegreat]

Given the critiques we've gotten on our cards as they are, would it be possible to have some sort of re-submission, altered?  Or would that be better done in separate threads?

[Kirian]

* Every card placing 2nd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have MULTIPLE winning cards in the set.  Most 2nd-place cards got included this way, but a couple did not.

* Every card placing 3rd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have ANY winning cards in the set.  The majority of 3rd-place cards got included this way, but several did not.

I'm interested to know who/what was in this group!  There are four of us with multiple cards (eHalcyon, Polk, Greystripe and myself).

[popsofctown]

Sorry Witch is better than every official dedicated curser.  For serious.  The symmetric draw keeps the game going, and since the symmetric draw outlasts the curse stack it's trickier to decide how much to invest in it.  It's also interesting to have a game where dilution is happening and has to be evaluated, but the pace and clocks are closer to a normal game.  Only Governor+Witch can create that experience in official dominion.

I'd actually like Sorry Witch better at 3$ though so it's less boom tada da with TFB.  I think it would (barely) pass the "don't open two of these" test.  Maybe. Maybe not but I'd like to test it at 3$.

Retirement Village is busted, no one vote for it.  You can't add 1 VP to a card without breaking a cost gap of at least 4-5$.  Actually, a 5$ Retirement Village might be cool.

Bribe is strictly better than Silver and needs to be 5$, which then makes it an inaccessible reaction card.  Please don't vote for that thing.

[eHalcyon]

* Every card placing 2nd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have MULTIPLE winning cards in the set.  Most 2nd-place cards got included this way, but a couple did not.

* Every card placing 3rd in a challenge is included in the ballot below if its author does not already have ANY winning cards in the set.  The majority of 3rd-place cards got included this way, but several did not.

I'm interested to know who/what was in this group!  There are four of us with multiple cards (eHalcyon, Polk, Greystripe and myself).

I think I had a single second place finish, which came before my first winner.  It was a much more interesting version (to me) of Harbinger, submitted to the interaction contest.  It was non-terminal draw 5, opponents to left and right each discard one.  So theoretically the worst 3/5.

[DWetzel]

Bribe is strictly better than Silver and needs to be 5$, which then makes it an inaccessible reaction card.  Please don't vote for that thing.

As the sucker who submitted this card in the first place, I think the "strictly better than silver ----> must be $5" thing doesn't really apply here, since it's effectively a Silver with only a one-shot benefit, and at some point if all you're doing is buying these to repel attacks and accumulating a Silver every time you use it, you're probably going to use.  Point conceded that if you're going to buy a Silver for $4 you probably want to buy this instead, though "do I want to run out a pile" considerations apply if you aren't actually using it to repel attacks.  I actually agree it would be a horribly weak card at $5, but maybe that's sort of a clue that maybe $4 isn't so bad after all.

[Tables]

It's weird the two cards I have in this contest. One Cobbler was the first card I ever designed, and I guess it's a solid, albeit slightly weak, engine smoother, while the other Street Performer is kinda fun even though Scheme slightly stepped on it's shoes (I designed both before Hinterlands). And my favourite two cards I think didn't even finish top half of their ballots.

I suspect the answer will be no, but I'd like to know if we can make minor tweaks to our own cards here. In particular I'd like to Drop Cobbler's price to $3 - it's not overpowered to open double Cobbler and I think $4 is a tad too dear to smooth many engines..

All these cards are good... it's gonna be tough to vote.

[yuma]

I would also prefer to alter the card that I have listed after receiving feedback if possible, I do understand that this opens up a can of worms as many others may wish to alter theirs as well...

[DWetzel]

I would also prefer to alter the card that I have listed after receiving feedback if possible, I do understand that this opens up a can of worms as many others may wish to alter theirs as well...

Either all or none, of course, but I'd be maybe interested in tweaking mine as well.

[Tables]

Idea: We're in no rush, right? How about giving everyone who has a card here 72 hours to send Rinkworks 'refinements' to the cards, with the new list published afterwards. I think 'refinements' could be a fairly subjective thing, basically as long as the core concept of the card is the same. So for instance, giving scout +1 card would count, but not making it pick up any of your choice of cards (I mean, Scout is broken enough already).

[nopawnsintended]

Idea: We're in no rush, right? How about giving everyone who has a card here 72 hours to send Rinkworks 'refinements' to the cards, with the new list published afterwards. I think 'refinements' could be a fairly subjective thing, basically as long as the core concept of the card is the same. So for instance, giving scout +1 card would count, but not making it pick up any of your choice of cards (I mean, Scout is broken enough already).

I like this idea, but then again, my card would benefit from a simple tweak, as well (based on the feedback from the contest).

[NoMoreFun]

I hope the creators get a chance to refine the cards


I playtested Zealot, and while it's fun, it very rarely isn't a Laboratory; I spammed it and only once was the zealot "dead". I suggest switching from odd to even; maybe making it a cantrip on odds and increasing the price to 4.

The set seems to need another village, and there are 4 on offer here that I like

Flea Market (which will need a name change) looks pretty good; it seems like a great estate trasher (using it to gain itself) but it's deceptive. Its best use will be to speed up greening after you've exhausted the use of your $5 actions, but also as a Band of Misfits variant. It's one I'd like to see

I loved the concept of Ghost Town, but I didn't understand why it wasn't "discard other than from play". Comboing with cards like Oasis is fine. It could also do with a boost - maybe give it $1 or another benefit with self synergising, (benefit+discard a card, spy effect).

Retirement Village is a card I'd like to see more of, and it fills a few niches at once. It also seems to have a good "alt VP" thing going on; buying retirement villages makes it easier to buy more.

Survivor's Village is an improved fishing village, although not getting the $1 is a big loss, but it just might work at 5.

My favourite of the lot is Diviner. It seems to have some extremely powerful combos, but many of them are nombos (trashing junk cards makes sifters less necessary and militias hurt harder). I'm not sure it's best served by simply being a cantrip though.

[PenPen]

I don't have a card in here, but all of these runner up cards are still very interesting, so I'd love to put my votes to the cards I like in this one.

I suppose what rinkworks put up would be final and we'll fine tune the winners from this contest afterwards.

[GendoIkari]

Heirloom should probably be reworded and no be a reaction card. A simple "when you trash this" should suffice.

[Qvist]

Heirloom should probably be reworded and no be a reaction card. A simple "when you trash this" should suffice.

And Diviner should be a Reaction card, right?

This is the last hope for me to get a card into the set with 2 entries here, but I don't think I'll win this with such good and interesting other cards.

Some comments:
Town Fool and Sorry Witch are pretty similar. It might be hard for one to win because they likely will split at least some votes. But I like both.
Recruiter is another Attack card I really like.
Archaeologist is basically Scavanger. I think it won't win. Street Performer is a better alternative.
Diviner and Bursar are also similar. And Cobbler goes in the same direction too, but seems very powerful for $4.
Thanksgiving is a very board-depending but interesting card.
Broker is a neat little brother of Archivist. I like it, but I rather not have it in the set, if Archivist will be in the set.

[rinkworks]

Seems like we have a community consensus.  The people have spoken!

Voting for these cards has been suspended.  Instead, the authors of cards in this contest have until Monday, October 15, 2012, 10am EDT, to submit revisions of the cards included on the ballot.  Send your revisions by PM to me.  If I receive no revision for a particular card, I will keep it as-is.

Authors should make sure all revisions preserve the underlying spirit of the card as listed in the OP.  That is, don't abuse the opportunity to submit a "revision" that is really a brand new card.  If you're unsure about whether a change is too severe or not, feel free to include two different possible revisions in your PM to me:  a more extensive revision you prefer, and an alternate revision if I deem it too much of a change.  I'll tend to err in your favor, though; I don't really want to police this any heavier than I have to.

On Monday, I'll post a revised ballot and open the voting again.

[GendoIkari]

Authors should make sure all revisions preserve the underlying spirit of the card as listed in the OP.  That is, don't abuse the opportunity to submit a "revision" that is really a brand new card.  If you're unsure about whether a change is too severe or not, feel free to include two different possible revisions in your PM to me:  a more extensive revision you prefer, and an alternate revision if I deem it too much of a change.  I'll tend to err in your favor, though; I don't really want to police this any heavier than I have to.

When you think about it, Bazaar is really just a slight revision to Woodcutter. They just replaced the Buy with 2 actions and a card, then lowered how much money you get and raised the price to balance it out.

[rinkworks]

Authors should make sure all revisions preserve the underlying spirit of the card as listed in the OP.  That is, don't abuse the opportunity to submit a "revision" that is really a brand new card.  If you're unsure about whether a change is too severe or not, feel free to include two different possible revisions in your PM to me:  a more extensive revision you prefer, and an alternate revision if I deem it too much of a change.  I'll tend to err in your favor, though; I don't really want to police this any heavier than I have to.

When you think about it, Bazaar is really just a slight revision to Woodcutter. They just replaced the Buy with 2 actions and a card, then lowered how much money you get and raised the price to balance it out.

Donald is fond of telling the story of how, in the early days of Dominion, he didn't have Golds.  This was to encourage people to buy expensive action cards instead of just buying up more Treasure.  But the game was too laborious when none of the action cards provided virtual coins.  So he thought, hey, what if I took Black Market, stripped out the special deck and the ability to play Treasures early, increased the amount of money it made, made it a Treasure, and doubled the price?  That seemed to do the trick:  it worked so well that the revised Black Market became a basic card.  As a gift to fans curious about Dominion history, the original Black Market was released as a promo.

True story.

[eHalcyon]

Authors should make sure all revisions preserve the underlying spirit of the card as listed in the OP.  That is, don't abuse the opportunity to submit a "revision" that is really a brand new card.  If you're unsure about whether a change is too severe or not, feel free to include two different possible revisions in your PM to me:  a more extensive revision you prefer, and an alternate revision if I deem it too much of a change.  I'll tend to err in your favor, though; I don't really want to police this any heavier than I have to.

When you think about it, Bazaar is really just a slight revision to Woodcutter. They just replaced the Buy with 2 actions and a card, then lowered how much money you get and raised the price to balance it out.

Donald is fond of telling the story of how, in the early days of Dominion, he didn't have Golds.  This was to encourage people to buy expensive action cards instead of just buying up more Treasure.  But the game was too laborious when none of the action cards provided virtual coins.  So he thought, hey, what if I took Black Market, stripped out the special deck and the ability to play Treasures early, increased the amount of money it made, made it a Treasure, and doubled the price?  That seemed to do the trick:  it worked so well that the revised Black Market became a basic card.  As a gift to fans curious about Dominion history, the original Black Market was released as a promo.

True story.

Also, Wharf is actually a slightly nerfed Scout variant.

[Rush_Clasic]

I loved the concept of Ghost Town, but I didn't understand why it wasn't "discard other than from play". Comboing with cards like Oasis is fine. It could also do with a boost - maybe give it $1 or another benefit with self synergising, (benefit+discard a card, spy effect).

1) It didn't seem that weak to me when it was designed, and after much thought, I still agree. How much virtual card-draw does a cheaper village need to give? I'm not sure, but I don't think it's much.
2) I wanted to avoid the awkwardness of things like Secret Chamber. That is, if I discard a Ghost Town to Secret Chamber, does it return to my hand right away? Can I infinitely cycle it? That's not a question I want players considering. There are some ways to fix it, but nothing elegant.

That said, it might want a revision. Here's the list of cards in currently interacts with based on the reaction alone:

COMBOS
spy
adventurer
lookout
navigator
scrying pool
golem
harvest
hunting party
duchess
oracle
jack of all trades
cartographer
catacombs
ironmonger
rebuild
sage
survivors

DEFENSE
thief
saboteur
tribute
pirate ship
sea hag
rabble
fortune teller
jester
noble brigand
rogue
knights

NOMBO
loan
venture

That isn't the most in the world, but that's only considering the reaction aspect. Any card like Library works well with a village that lowers your hand count. (Speaking of, I don't think the reaction works with Library, but I'm not sure.) And villages tend to be necessary buys in a variety of engines. If the right idea shows up, I'll adjust it accordingly.

[NoMoreFun]

It would also combo with Gatherer and Harbinger, and the variant would combo with Retort, Flea Market and Silver Smelter. It's not that amazing in this set, but it works great with so many other cards. I'd still consider self synergising somehow, even if it's a very weak effect (eg reveal the top 3 cards of your deck, discard the actions and treasures and put the rest in your hand).

Ghost town with "discard outside a clean up phase" (like tunnel) doesn't strike me as any more complicated than fortress. The secret chamber problem is the same as playing a Mercenary when you have one fortress in hand; you can't trash the fortress than trash it again. At any rate, "discard outside a clean up phase" is less ambiguous than "discard from your deck" - since cards that you reveal from your deck aren't in your deck, given that you have to "put them back".

At any rate, I hope you get it all figured out. It's an amazing concept, and this set needs another village.

[GendoIkari]

I loved the concept of Ghost Town, but I didn't understand why it wasn't "discard other than from play". Comboing with cards like Oasis is fine. It could also do with a boost - maybe give it $1 or another benefit with self synergising, (benefit+discard a card, spy effect).

1) It didn't seem that weak to me when it was designed, and after much thought, I still agree. How much virtual card-draw does a cheaper village need to give? I'm not sure, but I don't think it's much.
2) I wanted to avoid the awkwardness of things like Secret Chamber. That is, if I discard a Ghost Town to Secret Chamber, does it return to my hand right away? Can I infinitely cycle it? That's not a question I want players considering. There are some ways to fix it, but nothing elegant.

That said, it might want a revision. Here's the list of cards in currently interacts with based on the reaction alone:

COMBOS
spy
adventurer
lookout
navigator
scrying pool
golem
harvest
hunting party
duchess
oracle
jack of all trades
cartographer
catacombs
ironmonger
rebuild
sage
survivors

DEFENSE
thief
saboteur
tribute
pirate ship
sea hag
rabble
fortune teller
jester
noble brigand
rogue
knights

NOMBO
loan
venture

That isn't the most in the world, but that's only considering the reaction aspect. Any card like Library works well with a village that lowers your hand count. (Speaking of, I don't think the reaction works with Library, but I'm not sure.) And villages tend to be necessary buys in a variety of engines. If the right idea shows up, I'll adjust it accordingly.

Scrying Pool is an amusing combo.... Scrying Pool reveals Ghost Town. You can keep it there, thus drawing it and continuing on the search... or you can discard it, putting it in your hand, and continuing on with the search... absolutely no difference. Of course, it works as Scrying Pool defense.

[NoMoreFun]

I don't know about you, but I'd go for the novelty "discard" option every single time.

[NoMoreFun]

Do the revised cards need to satisfy the contest that they were originally designed for?