Print

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

[KingZog3]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

Uh...no?

[ipofanes]

Ruined Outlook
$0
Trash the top card from your deck.

[ipofanes]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

Uh...no?

I think Davio meant an out of order moat might as well be spanned by a bridge.

[GendoIkari]

Ruined Scout
+1 Action
Reveal the top 4 cards of your deck. Put the revealed Victory cards into your hand. Put the other cards on top of your deck in any order.

Yes, I left the +1 Action on purpose. Yes, it is better than Ruined Village. Yes, it is yet another Scout-joke.

*Ahem* http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3845.msg79043#msg79043

 

[soulnet]

*Ahem* http://forum.dominionstrategy.com/index.php?topic=3845.msg79043#msg79043

Yes, it was plagiarism.

I had to give you a +1 (in the other thread, +2 seemed abusive and you had Copper in play).

[KingZog3]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

Uh...no?

I think Davio meant an out of order moat might as well be spanned by a bridge.

Ah that makes sense. My brain was trying to figure out how that Ruined Moat was similar to cost reduction...

[Asper]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "Why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry? Maybe make it 4$ and instead of a Treasure make it an action - you could reduce all cards costs instead of only actions, then." I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

[eHalcyon]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry?" I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Seems broken with KC.  KC-KC-SCx3 would be instant 8 Provinces.  But that's fairly difficult to achieve, so it's probably OK.

This card reminds me more of Moat than Quarry or Woodcutter.  Maybe you should give it a name related to that instead.  How about "Drawbridge"?

[ktartandude]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "Why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry? Maybe make it 4$ and instead of a Treasure make it an action - you could reduce all cards costs instead of only actions, then." I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Isn't this bridge?

EDIT: Ah, okay. Sorry, missed the joke. Should read more carefully....

[gman314]

I also totally missed the joke.

[ipofanes]

Ruined Bridge
$0     Action - Ruins
While this is in play, this card costs $1 less, but not less than $0.

[mail-mi]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry?" I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Seems broken with KC.  KC-KC-SCx3 would be instant 8 Provinces.  But that's fairly difficult to achieve, so it's probably OK.

This card reminds me more of Moat than Quarry or Woodcutter.  Maybe you should give it a name related to that instead.  How about "Drawbridge"?

Too long. Just bridge would probably be fine.

[GendoIkari]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry?" I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Seems broken with KC.  KC-KC-SCx3 would be instant 8 Provinces.  But that's fairly difficult to achieve, so it's probably OK.

This card reminds me more of Moat than Quarry or Woodcutter.  Maybe you should give it a name related to that instead.  How about "Drawbridge"?

Too long. Just bridge would probably be fine.

That's no good... I think Intrigue already has a different card named "Bridge."

[Asper]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry?" I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Seems broken with KC.  KC-KC-SCx3 would be instant 8 Provinces.  But that's fairly difficult to achieve, so it's probably OK.

This card reminds me more of Moat than Quarry or Woodcutter.  Maybe you should give it a name related to that instead.  How about "Drawbridge"?

Too long. Just bridge would probably be fine.

That's no good... I think Intrigue already has a different card named "Bridge."

Maybe another name that is close to Moat... As a Moat is a cavity with water in it, how about a well? Wishing Well, maybe - you can wish for cheaper cards?

Edit: Okay, obviously the lose-track rule applies to this thread.

[mail-mi]

Isn't a Ruined Moat simply a Bridge?

When the Guild speculation brought up the card name Stonecutter, i tried to think of what that card would do, and a mix of Woodcutter and Quarry seemed logical. It had to be balanced, of course, so i thought "why not replace one of the +2$ from Woodcutter with a cost reduction like Quarry?" I ended up with this:

Stonecutter
Action, 4$
+1$
+1 Buy
All cards (including cards in the players hands) cost one less this turn.

Do you think that would be balanced?

Seems broken with KC.  KC-KC-SCx3 would be instant 8 Provinces.  But that's fairly difficult to achieve, so it's probably OK.

This card reminds me more of Moat than Quarry or Woodcutter.  Maybe you should give it a name related to that instead.  How about "Drawbridge"?

Too long. Just bridge would probably be fine.

That's no good... I think Intrigue already has a different card named "Bridge."

bridge. Not Bridge, bridge. Completely different.